Political markets in Dutch municipalities: an interpretive policy study of the cases Almere and Hengelo

(1)

0

POLITICAL MARKETS IN DUTCH MUNICIPALITIES:

AN INTERPRETIVE POLICY STUDY OF THE CASES ALMERE AND HENGELO

Master thesis

Jeroen Veenhuizen

FACULTY OF BEHAVIOURAL, MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCES (BMS) PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

EXAMINATION COMMITTEE Dr. Peter Stegmaier Dr. Pieter-Jan Klok

August 2016

(2)

MASTER THESIS

Family name: Veenhuizen Given name: Jeroen Alexander Master program: Public Administration

Faculty: Behavioural, management and social sciences (BMS) Date: August 22^nd, 2016

First supervisor: Dr. Peter Stegmaier

Second supervisor: Dr. Pieter-Jan Klok

Title master thesis:

Political markets in Dutch municipalities: an interpretive policy study of the cases Almere and Hengelo

Hengelo, August 2016

(3)

2

ABSTRACT

Changes in our world, such as globalisation and the internet, have had an impact on how we

communicate with each other. This has had consequences for the dialogue between citizens and their local governments. A product of these changes is the political market in the Netherlands. Instead of citizens being informed about new policy decisions, the promise of a political market is that citizens have an actual opportunity to discuss policy proposals with representatives of their municipality.

To get more insight in the working mechanisms of a political market, two cases are observed and analysed. This involves the collection of data through observations, interviews and documents, in the municipalities is Almere and Hengelo. Analysis took place in an interpretive manner, with the help of scientific software program Atlas.ti. Furthermore, the institutional analyses and development (IAD)- framework and existing theories concerning policy-making provided the theoretical framework.

The political market was developed in the municipality of Almere, where it was implemented in 2004.

A presidium decides which topics are suitable for a political market session and consequently places them on the political market agenda. The topic is then talked about in a political market session called the ‘carrousel’, in which the main idea is to gather information and opinions from council members, citizens and aldermen. Thereafter the ‘debate’ and ‘decision-making’ sessions take place.

In Hengelo the first political market was held 10 years later, in 2014. A workgroup had been investigating the possibilities to increase citizen participation in their municipality. The political market seemed to them an instrument as to achieve that goal. Just as in Almere, there is a presidium instated which decides on suitable topics for a political market session. Some topics are send through to city council directly for decision-making as ‘hamerstukken’. If a topic is suitable for a political market it is first discussed in a ‘beeldvormende’ to gather ideas and afterwards in an

‘oordeelsvormende’ session to pave the way for a final decision in city council.

The political market underlines that policy making is not a set cycle of stages, such as the classic policy cycle, but rather a continuous cycle of interactions. According to Ostrom, the political market is an action arena within the institution of a municipality. An action situation is a situation in which

‘individuals observe information, select actions, engage in patterns of interaction, and realize outcomes from their interaction’. In the context of a political market there are six positions; the chairman, a representative of the registrar’s office, an alderman, a city official, council members and citizens. This last group can also consist of representatives of institutions. The people in these positions are often there on the basis of specific policy knowledge, or because they represent local concerns. The actions a position can take differs, sometimes even per session type. In Hengelo an alderman can, for example, not answer questions in a ’beeldvormende market, but he can in an

‘oordeelsvormende market’. The possible outcomes of a political market are: sending the subject through to city council for decision-making, present an adjustment or reschedule the subject for further discussion. Since the political markets are recorded, it can be beneficial for the people participating to increase their reputation by their performance. Based on this research, three conclusions can be drawn:

- The political markets as an instrument to increase citizen participation and efficiency has not been fully realized;

- There is no uniform political market model;

- The role of citizens is limited.

(4)

The role of citizens is essential in any political market, yet the results show that the political market is mainly a platform for council members. Therefore, it would be recommended to accentuate the role of the citizen. This can be achieved by:

- Recommendation 1: Give citizens more opportunities to influence the political market;

- Recommendation 2: Decrease the amount of topics and meetings;

- Recommendation 3: Provide clear information about the political market towards citizens.

Keywords

Public sector, municipalities, Netherlands, Almere, Hengelo, interpretive.

(5)

4

PREFACE

In my former studies and experiences I have only brushed upon the practice of policy-making going on at the municipal level. In the study of public administration this is nevertheless an essential part of the curriculum. So although I did read and learn about public administration, I did not have the opportunity to really delve into this interesting subject. This is what drove me to seek out a master thesis subject that matched with this desire. A second wish was to do a type of research that I had not done before. Both wishes came together in the interpretive research of the political markets.

The idea for investigating the political markets began to take shape after attending the course on

‘Policy Analysis in Public and Technological Domains’ in the first quartile of my master study. Through the second and third quartile the research started to take form. What began as a broad range of questions and subjects evolved into a concrete research plan, especially when I also began doing observations and started conducting interviews. The research I did was an ever expanding project, every interview and observation was another part of the learning process which eventually led to the result that lies before you.

I have enjoyed working on the master thesis and it has been interesting all the way through. Perhaps more importantly; it has been a joyful leaning process. I would like to thank my supervisor’s Dr. Peter Stegmaier and Dr. Pieter-Jan Klok, and all contributors to the interviews and observations.

Hengelo, 2016 Jeroen Veenhuizen

(6)

ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS

This chapter is used to describe abbreviations and explain certain Dutch words that could not be translated into English without losing its actual meaning.

ABBREVIATIONS

VNG Union of Dutch municipalities (Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenten)

IAD Institutional Analysis and Development

DEFINITIONS

These are the essential semantic elements of the life-world encountered in this research, original terms from the field, which I define for the non-Dutch reader drawing upon the definitions used by actors in the field themselves:

Amendement Proposal for adjustment

Beeldvormende markt: A political market session in which discussion is stimulated, the core goal is to gather ideas

Beleidsmaatregelen: Means, facilities or actions focused on achieving policy goals Carroussel A political market session in Almere with the goal to gather ideas College van B&W Committee consisting of the mayor and all the aldermen

Griffier Registrar

Hamerstukken: Subjects that are directly send through to city council for decision making

Motie Official adjustment request

Oordeelsvormende market: A political market session in which the opinions have already taken a more final phase

Portefeuillehouder Subject-owner

Presidium A group of city council members assigned with the task of deciding with policy subject are placed on the political market agenda

Raadslid City Council Member

Voorzitter: The chairman of a meeting, more specifically, of a political market

(8)

INTRODUCTION

A basic tenet of a healthy democracy is open dialogue and transparency - Peter Fenn¹

Policy-making is not a static process, instead it is a continuous cycle of interactions. Policies are often placed on the political agenda on the basis of the level of earnestness of a certain situation. From there on out new policies are drawn up. The political market is a vital part in this cycle towards policy- making. In this political ‘action arena’, interaction is an instrument to influence the formulation of policy. The political market takes place in the ‘institution’ of Dutch municipalities. Little agreement exist, however, on what the term ‘institution’ means. Riker defines institutions as ‘rules about behaviour, especially about making decisions’ (1982). Charles Plott also defines institutions to mean

‘the rules for individual expression, information transmittal and social choice…’ (1979: 156). The multiplicity of uses for a key term like ‘institution’ signals a problem in the general conception of scholars of how preferences, rules, individual strategies, customs and norms, and the current

structural aspects of ongoing political systems are related to each other. The ‘solution’ is the result of our choice of strategies about the use of a set of terms to refer to the objects and relations of interest in our field (Ostrom, 1986). The proposed strategy by Elinor Ostrom to analyse action arenas is through seven variables that form the structure of a situation: position, boundary, scope, authority, aggregation, information and payoff. This ‘Institutional Analyses and Development’ (IAD)-framework is used in this research to study the political markets.

The ‘action arena’ of a political market is part of a broader process of policy-making. It takes place in the ‘institution’ of Dutch municipalities, which are, in turn, subject to change. Especially in 2002, when municipalities had to adjust their internal external organisation. One of the goals of these mandatory adjustments was to increase citizen participation (Dick Hanemaayer, 2008). This was in line with the challenges the Netherlands was faced with, as Keman (2008) puts it “in the peaceful co- existence between the political establishment and the public (i.e. electorate) at large is over. Dutch traditions of consensus, cooperation and seeking compromise by means of consociational practices appear to have evaporated (Keman, 2008).” Among other measures, a ‘political market’ was developed as a result of these changes (Huisman, 2004). This research delves into this ‘political market model’ and describes its working mechanisms. The following research question helps to summarise this goal:

“What is a political market, how does it function and how do the political markets in Almere and Hengelo differ?”

Accompanying the research question I have formulated two sub-questions:

1. How did the political markets in Almere and Hengelo develop from the committee model to its current status?

2. What are the working mechanisms of the political markets in Almere and Hengelo?

Through these sub-questions the different facets of the political markets are researched. The

research itself takes place by conducting observations, interviewing actors and by studying literature.

The results are further analysed with scientific software such as Atlas.ti.

1Peter Fenn, POLITICO: THE ARENA (Apr. 23, 2009), http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Peter_Fenn_149A409A-FDA2-41EA-ACA1- 41133DF86F66.html.

(9)

8

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter the methodology of the research is described. This is divided in sub-chapters entailing the method of sampling, the process of collecting and analysing data and a discussion.

THEORETICAL SAMPLING

To sample theoretically, the researcher makes a strategic decision about what or who will provide the most information-rich source of data to meet their analytical needs (Birks & Mills, 2010). The ‘sample’

is thus chosen by reasoning, not at random. For this research the political markets in the

municipalities of Almere and Hengelo are chosen as samples. Almere is the city were the political market originated, which makes it an interesting case in the sense of development. In the

municipality of Hengelo the implementation of the political market took place 10 years later, the comparison in time and type of city makes this an information-rich source.

DATA COLLECTION; STRATEGY AND FRAMEWORK

The collection of data took place in the municipalities of Almere and Hengelo. The method of

collecting data has been interpretative. Schwartz-Shea & Yanow (2012) describe this as research that focusses on specific, situated and meaning-making practices of actors in a given context (Schwartz- Shea & Yanow, 2012). This entails identifying groups of stakeholders, policy artefacts and the policy process (Yanow, 2000). Interpretive research typically draws on three main methods of generating data: observing, interviewing and reading. For the research of the political market this means: making field notes, conducting interviews and reviewing literature. In the field notes the ‘thick descriptions’

of the research site, events, conversations, observed interactions, and so forth are recorded. To do this I have attended and participated in the political markets in the municipalities of Almere and Hengelo. This lead to employing grounded theory, since I began discovering theory from data.

According to Glaser and Strauss (1967) discovery of theory from data, systematically obtained and analysed in social research, is a major task in confronting sociology (Barney G. Glaser, 1967).

O^BSERVING

We base our perceptions upon how we view the world and on our participation in social

relationships. Those with whom we interact or with whom we can interact directly represent a world of consociates. Within this grouping, we may participate in Thou, We, or They relationships in terms of whether we view ourselves as participants in projects (directed action) and whether we view others as subjects or objects of action. In We relationships there is great potential to understand truly the motives and interests of others. According to Schütz, there is also a distinction between what is

“here” for the individual and what is “there.” That is, individuals have an internal understanding of their world and the world that is outside (Natanson, 1970). Perspectives on phenomena may change in space and time, and we may also share perspectives. Perceptual meaning is all-important. For example, we can view a hammer as an object and as a means of hammering a nail. When we see a hammer, we generally perceive it in both senses. The content and context of phenomena are parts of our consciousness. By contrast, as relationships become more distant, farther from our own

understanding, we tend to create abstract explanations. We interpret, extrapolate, and develop ideal types to explain the motives and actions of others and, thus, lose fundamental understanding of perceptions and perspectives (Kirkhart, 1971). In effect, the They perspective or orientation separates the observer from the actors being studied and the observer must interpret actions without

necessarily having the advantage of understanding the reality that is driving them. The observer's own reality may also bias the observer.

(10)

The result may be a process of typifying the world (Natanson, 1973) because of the tendency to relate observed phenomena with facts or objects already known through prior experience and

interpretations shared within a society or smaller social grouping. There are conventions that reflect selectivity in attention and these pose a limitation or obstacle for the scientist.

Perhaps the best-known applications of phenomenological inquiry in the social sciences have been the anthropological and sociological uses of participant-observation as a means of gaining insight into the motivations and values of subject-actors. Biologists have even used the same technique to observe animal behavior by placing researchers within animal herds and other social groupings.

Cultural anthropologists have used it to gain the confidence of and insight into primitive societies. The researcher seeks to achieve common-sense knowledge of the observed actors by interacting within their social world, with or without the subject-actors knowing that they are being observed. A major facet of the phenomenological critique of behaviorism is the presumed connection between attitudes and behavior. Phenomenologists do not make the distinction between cognition and action. Both are part of the same process. Other applications of phenomenological techniques have been personal interviewing, usually unstructured interviewing, and the study of personal documents, to aid in understanding the lived-world of actors (Bogdan & Taylor, 1975, pp. 4-7). An application of phenomenological techniques in the study of history, for example, would involve the researcher immersing him or herself in historic literature, such as diaries, letters, autobiographies, and other personal accounts of events, in order to understand why individuals and groups behaved as they did during a particular period of time or in response to a particular stimulus. At this juncture public administration scholars began to explore the utility of phenomenology as a tool of social science research and as a vehicle for understanding fundamental changes that were taking place in society in order to guide policy making and government administration.

By observing the political markets I have gained essential information about how a political market works, what the rules are and how participants act in such an arena. From the start of my

observations concepts were developed about observation-categories. With every observation these improved, into the final scheme hereunder.

Number Concept category

1 Surrounding

2 Key actors

3 Attendance

4 Walkthrough (actions/interactions)

5 Atmosphere

6 Results

Figure 1: Observation scheme. These are categories which I used to collect observation data of the political markets.

INTERVIEWING

When it comes to interviews ethnographic interviews play an important role, since opportunities for an interview often arise spontaneously and surprisingly from regular field contacts. Ethnographic interviews are a series of friendly conversations into which the researcher slowly introduces new elements to assist informants to respond as informants (Flick, 2009). Besides ethnographic interviews, five expert interviews have been conducted, since experts have technical process oriented and interpretive knowledge referring to their specific professional sphere of activity (Flick, 2009). These experts consisted of a registrar, an alderman, two council members, a presidium member and a researcher. The five interviews took place in the municipalities of Almere and Hengelo in late 2014 and throughout 2015.

(11)

10

R^EADING

Aside from field notes and interviews the gathering of relevant literature was an essential part of the data collection process. This entails policy documents, scientific articles and books about citizen participation and searching for relevant research done in the past.

DATA ANALYSIS

The purpose of phenomenological social science research is to “make explicit what is implicit in the social action of members of a given society” (Goldstein, 1963, p. 295). Stewart and Mickanus offered a brief characterization of the phenomenological view of society stating that “phenomenology views society as comprising free persons making choices within the context of the value system of the society” (Stewart & Mickanus, 1974, pp. 128-129). To understand the structures and institutions of society, one has to understand the values that underlie their creation. The key to phenomenological research in the social sciences is value structures. Many phenomenologists view values not as absolute, but as identifiable "object-like” phenomena. Basic values may change, but they are “nearly universally experienced," and, as transcendent phenomena, they can be isolated or bracketed through intuitive inquiry (Friedrich, 1973, pp. 182-183). The hallmark of interpretative policy analysis is a focus on meaning that is situated in a particular context. Almere and Hengelo both have audio recordings of all of their political markets available. The political market in Almere is also video recorded.

I have worked with a procedure for the data collecting and analysing process called: the Grounded Theory Approach. This means that I have first taken notes from the political market in Hengelo, analysed them, then conducted interviews, analysing those, checking policy documents, analyse them and finish with a draft case summary. The same procedure I have applied in Almere.

To process the words and phrases from the interviews and field notes I have employed the scientific software program Atlas.ti. From there on out the process of coding and discovering patterns begins.

This involves interpreting the spoken and written language from interviews, policy documents, recordings and ethnographic field notes. The next step was to compare these results with the theory.

DISCUSSION

There is discussion about the extent in which interpretative research can ensure the same level of quality as positivist research. In this section I will delve into this discussion only as far as necessary as to make this study understandable to the reader, and thereby present the methods I have used to guarantee quality in qualitative, interpretive, research.

INTERPRETATIVE RESEARCH

Interpretative methods are as scientific as positivist ones, in the sense that ‘science’ requires procedural systematically and posture of doubt and disproof. Interpretative does not mean

‘impressionistic’. Even though interpretative methods emphasize the centrality of human

interpretation and, hence, subjective meaning they are, nonetheless, a method: systematic, step- wise, and methodical. But because they rely on human meaning-making, which is of necessity responsive to the highly variable context of the research setting, the steps of these methods typically cannot be lined out in as discrete and regularized a fashion as those of cost-benefit or decision or regression or grid-group analysis and their counterparts. In practice however, interpretative method are as formal as the others (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2012).

(12)

In positivist research, the trustworthiness of researcher’s claims is discussed in two general ways that reflect positivist presuppositions about and goals for knowledge. The first focusses on ‘validity’ and

‘reliability’ of operationalized variables and the general ‘replicability’ of a study; the second focuses on ‘threats’ to the goal of causal interference. These criteria and associated practices are ill-suited to interpretative research because it makes quite different assumptions about the stability of the social world and how researchers can know it. It has, therefore, developed quite different goals and a different logic of inquiry (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2012).

GUARANTEEING ‘^GOOD’^RESEARCH

Interpretative research is founded on the theoretical belief that reality is socially constructed and fluid. Thus, what we know is always negotiated within cultures, social settings, and relationships with other people. From this perspective, validity or truth cannot be grounded in an objective reality. What is taken to be valid or true is negotiated and there can be multiple valid claims to knowledge.

Angen (2000) describes that criteria such as making a written account and articulating choices help in evaluating research from an interpretive perspective. In regard to validity in interpretative research Angen (2000) argues that there is an ethical validity, which recognises that the choices we make through the research process have political and ethical consideration and substantive validity, which evaluates the substance or content of an interpretive work. In regard to validity in interpretative research overall Angen (2000) argues the following additional points: recognition that the choices we make through the research process have political and ethical consideration and evaluating the substance or content of an interpretive work (Angen, 2000).

RELEVANCE OF THE RESEARCH

By doing a study of the political markets in two municipalities I want to give insight in the working mechanisms of the political markets. This investigation will contribute to the literature on citizen participatory initiatives. There has been no scientific writing about the political market yet, so it is relevant for (1) Dutch discourse on municipal level democracy and (2) for international discourse on town level administration action. I want to be the first to provide readers with a basic understanding of what it means to enact and engage in political markets

Using the process of analytical induction I have examined the political market in detail and build theory from the bottom-up – based on observations of particular data. In the process of examining these cases over time I have continually refined and developed new theories to explain the observed phenomena. The resulting hypotheses can be used in turn to do new research. The hypotheses can then be tested by observing. The wheel of science has, then, come full circle.

There are many examples of qualitative studies that have made significant contributions to public policy debates, such as Ostrom (1986), Hoppe (2011), Yanow (2000), Arnstein (1969) and Fung (2003).

They are all methodologically rigorous, scrupulously researched, and illustrate the importance of qualitative research for public policy research. Let my research of the political market phenomenon be a humble addition in this tradition of research.

(13)

12

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In this chapter I present my theoretical framework. Such a framework provides a particular

perspective, or lens, through which to examine a topic. It deals with approaching the subject of the political markets. More specific, it is an explanation of the theories used to study the political market.

MUNICIPAL ORGANISATION

In the Netherlands, municipalities are led by the Mayor and municipal executives. The municipal executive board consists of aldermen who belong to the ruling political coalition, which is responsible for making policy proposals. The people’s representation carries herein the power; this institution is named the municipal council. The representatives of the municipal council are elected by a four year electoral cycle. A typical municipal council consists of groups and factions of political parties. The task of the municipal council is to supervise, question, criticize and attack the municipal executives if necessary. The size of the municipal council depends on the number of residents living in the

municipality; the biggest municipalities have forty-five seats and the smallest only seven (Gemeenten, sd). There is a system of political accountability in place in which the executives are accountable to the Council for their policies and implementation. The municipal secretary has herein the task to advise and support the municipal executives, and heads the municipal administrative system (Figee et al., 2008; Twist et al., 2008). This organizational structure is visualized in figure 2. In this context the municipality is an institution, or according to Ostrom (1986) a “human-made system within which individual choices take place and which configure consequences of the respective choices (Ostrom, 1986).”

Figure 2: Municipal organisation scheme

INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

Ostrom’s framework for institutional analysis (Ostrom et al., 1994) focuses on formal organisation and rules at multiple levels of the state as a source of governance. In this ‘institution’ of the Dutch municipal organisation, the political market takes place. Ostrom (2005) builds on earlier work (1990) to explore and explain the wide diversity of institutions that humans use to govern their behaviour.

Ostrom examines collaboration in governance of common pool resources. She attempts to identify an underlying set of universal building blocks and to provide a common vocabulary and syntax for researching institutions and how they function.

(14)

She argues that these universal building blocks are in layers that one can analyse using the

Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework (Ostrom, 2005, p. 6). The simplest unit of analysis is the action situation. The action situation may be embedded within deeper layers;

structures are nested (Ostrom, 2005, p. 11). To analyse an action situation, Ostrom uses seven categories of information: 1) the set of participants [single individuals or corporate actors]; 2) the positions to be filled by participants; 3) potential outcomes; 4) the set of allowable actions and the function that maps actions into realized outcomes [action-outcome linkages]; 5) the control that an individual has in regards to this function; 6) the information available to participants about actions and outcomes and their linkages; and 7) costs and benefits – which serve as incentives and deterrents – assigned to actions and outcomes. (Ostrom, 2005, p. 32) These are the common structural

components that represent the building blocks for all institutions at their most general level. Once a researcher understands the initial action arena, he will often ‘zoom out’ (Ostrom, 2005, p. 15) to understand the outside variables that are affecting it; this is a two stage process. First, the action arena now becomes a dependent variable subject to factors in three categories of variables: ‘1) the rules used by participants to order their relationships, 2) the attributes of the biophysical world that are acted upon in these arenas, and 3) the structure of the more general community within which any particular arena is placed’ (Ostrom, 2005, pp. 15–16). In the second stage of the analysis, the

researcher will examine linkages between one action arena and others, either in sequence or at the same time. These categories of information provide a means to examine varieties of structure, processes, and models for collaborative governance more systematically. Moreover, our

understanding could benefit through a systematic comparison of institutions designed top-down with those that arise organically from the bottom-up, as in indigenous cultures managing forests and fisheries. The wide variety of collaborative processes and structures would benefit from a common frame for analysis. A figure of the IAD-framework is presented hereunder.

Figure 3: IAD-framework by Ostrom

The goal of the IAD-framework is to understand the ways an institution can operate and change over a period of time. The IAD-framework helps to perceive complex social phenomenon by dividing them into smaller pieces of practically understandable function. According to Ostrom (1986), IAD is a

"multi-level conceptual map" with which one could zoom in and out of particular hierarchical parts of the regularised interactions in an established social system. It assumes a context to the particular interaction in which the general network of regular actors would be analysed, the particular rules-in- use, and the particular common outcome that they hope to achieve. The basic problem in achieving collective action is stated by Elinor Ostrom: “A central finding [of collective action research] is that the world contains multiple types of individuals, some more willing than others to initiate reciprocity to achieve the benefits of collective action. Thus, a core question is how potential co-operators signal one another and design institutions that reinforce rather than destroy conditional cooperation”

(2000, p. 138)."

(15)

14 The IAD Framework has been criticized as not paying enough attention to specific nuances within participatory situations - problems of power related to social justice (e.g., Clement, 2010). It is my opinion that a clearer conceptualization of power and its role in determining stakeholder perceptions of social justice within institutional settings will broaden the ability of the IAD-framework to predict institutional success. A clearer treatment of power and social justice may also help further connect the findings of practitioners with the scientific theories intended to explain them. A further point of critique is that the framework is not specifically tailored for models such as a political market. This could mean that, during this research, the standard configuration will get a different completion.

An alternative for the IAD-framework is the ACF-model. The ACF focuses on policy subsystems and the IAD framework focuses on action situations. Whereas an action situation can be interpreted as a policy subsystem, the descriptive and explanatory power of institutions within the IAD framework weakens considerably at the policy subsystem level, something recent scholars within the IAD

framework are grappling with (Ostrom, 2009; Poteete, Janssen, & Ostrom, 2010). In contrast, the ACF is best applied at the subsystem level and less within specific action situations (e.g., decision making in a partnership). While subsystems are certainly shaped by various institutional configurations, the specifics of these arrangements become most apparent in the venues (interpreted as a type of action situation) in which coalitions seek to influence subsystem behaviour partly through institutional change or stasis. We quote Sabatier (1987, p. 684): “A logical extension of this [IAD framework] is to view policy change as partially the product of attempts by various actors to structure action

situations—chiefly institutional rules regarding the range and authority of participants—so as to produce the desired operational decisions.” Most importantly, the main point in comparing the ACF and the IAD framework is not to answer all the comparative questions, but to recognize that both frameworks represent different research programs marked by different research cultures, assumptions, scopes, and emphases on major concepts. For organizations, these rules are often embedded in legal mandates or commonly held beliefs regarding appropriate roles and

responsibilities. In a participatory setting, rules may be formal, such as written ground rules for working together, or informal, arising from the actual “doing” of joint work. In doing joint work, participant interactions (i.e., processes) shape and are shaped by structures and rules about how participants will work together. When these experiences are positive, moral obligations and

commitments increase and trust builds (Chen 2010; Jones, Hesterly, and Borgatti 1997). Conversely, if participants violate rules and norms, trust will be undermined and hard to rebuild. Together,

recognition of rules, the substance of rules, and structures for enforcing rules of three types—

operational rules, general policies about the work to be done, and constitutional rules regarding who gets to make what kinds of decisions—help allow process participants to self-monitor (reward and sanction behaviour), build commitment among themselves, and make or contribute to important decisions (Ostrom 1990). All efforts to organize collective action,” Ostrom (1990, p. 28) argues,

“whether by an external ruler, an entrepreneur, or a set of principles who wish to gain collective benefits, must address a common set of problems.” These have to do with coping with free-riding, solving commitment problems, arranging for the supply of new institutions, and monitoring individual compliance with sets of rules.”

SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION

An essential part of an action situation is interaction. A lot of colloquial language (spreektaal) is used in the political markets. This is especially true for the political market in Hengelo, an example of this are sentences such as “vet op de botten krijgen” (get tough skin) and “de druk is van de ketel” (the pressure has lifted). In describing interaction, the works of Blumer (1969) are an important addition.

These works are an instrument as to place a conversation in a specific context.

(16)

Central in the works of Blumer is the idea that language and significant symbols are used in the communication with others. Rather than addressing how common social institutions define and impact individuals, symbolic interactionists shift their attention to the interpretation of subjective viewpoints and how individuals make sense of their world from their unique perspective. Symbolic interactionists are often less concerned with objective structure than with subjective meaning – how repeated, meaningful interactions among individuals come to define the makeup of ‘society.’

Summarized succinctly, the basic tenets of symbolic interactionism state that: (1) individuals act based on the meanings objects have for them; (2) interaction occurs within a particular social and cultural context in which physical and social objects (persons), as well as situations, must be defined or categorized based on individual meanings; (3) meanings emerge from interactions with other individuals and with society; and (4) meanings are continuously created and recreated through interpreting processes during interaction with others (Blumer, 1969). As such, whilst observing actors in the action arena of the political market, interaction is a vital element of the equation. This

interaction is a part of the policy cycle as well, like glue throughout the policy processes.

POLICY FRAMEWORK

In addition to analysing the action arena of the political market, it is also interesting to investigate how subjects are placed on the political market agenda and what happens to them after a political market session. Together this will establish the political market as a separate heuristic. This is where the theory of the policy cycle is a welcome addition. In this model the starting point of the policy process is agenda setting followed by policy formulation, decision making, implementation and finally monitoring and evaluation (Hoogerwerf, 2003, p. 26). These specific policy processes were developed originally by Harold Laswell. He tried to formalize the relationship between the social sciences and practical policy making. This resulted in the development of a theory of a policy cycle consisting of five phases. From its origins in the 1950s, the field of policy analysis has been tightly connected with a perspective that considers the policy process as evolving through a sequence of discrete stages or phases. The policy cycle framework or perspective has served as a basic template that allows to systematize and compare the diverse debates, approaches, and models in the field and to assess the individual contribution of the respective approaches to the discipline. At the same time, the

framework has regularly been criticized in terms of its theoretical construction as well as in terms of its empirical validity. We are therefore confronted with an almost paradoxical situation: on the one hand of the policy research continues to rely on the stages or cycle perspective or is linked to one of its stages and research questions. On the other hand, the very concept of the stages perspective has become discredited by a variety of criticisms, including attacks on the theoretical status of the policy cycle as a framework, model or heuristic.

Beside the classic policy cycle there are also other heuristics about policy making. The core critique on the classic policy cycle is that is too much a simplification of reality (Bridgman, Davis, Althaus, 2007).

Because of this Bridgman, Davis and Althaus (2007) have made an eight step policy cycle consisting of the following additions: issue identification, policy analysis, policy instrument development,

consultation and coordination. Each phase has their own process, for example, agenda-setting is a term for the process of how policies are set on the agenda of policy-makers. This process is much debated in itself.

Despite its limitations, the policy cycle has developed into the most widely applied framework to organize and systemize the research on public policy. The policy cycle focuses attention on generic features of the policy process rather than on specific actors or institutions or particular substantial problems and respective programs.

(17)

16 Thereby, the policy cycle highlighted the significance of the policy domain (Burstein 1991) or

subsystem (Sabatier 1993; Howlett, Ramesh 2003) as the key level of analysis. However, policy studies seldom apply the whole policy cycle framework as an analytical model that guides the selection of questions and variables. While a number of textbooks and some edited volumes are based on the cycle framework, academic debates in the field of policy studies have emerged from research related to particular stages of the policy process rather than on the whole cycle. The stages of implementation and evaluation are not part of this research.

According to David Kingdon (2013) subjects are placed on the agenda by a combination of three streams: a problem stream (problem), a policy stream (solution) and a political stream (political will).

A weakness of the model is (1) the stream prediction of coupling under having the same workload and the intensity of the coupling is estimated in a simple linear way, which does not show the stream strengtheness, and (2) misses the link in evaluation and recommendation (De Vries, M.S, 2003, pp.

85-86). The theory of Kingdon is part of four major models for explaining how problems are placed on the policy agenda, his theory is part of the stream model. The other three theories are: the canyon model, the barrier model and the relative interest model (De Vries, M.S., 2003, p. 74). In the canyon model the level of earnestness of the problem is a deciding factor in the attention it gets. Defining is the discrepancy between the situation and the standard. In the barrier model the extent of the problem in comparison with other problems is a defining factor. Agenda setting is a process of taking barriers in this model (Bachrach and Baratz, 1970). In the relative interest model, the problems on the agenda are based on cultural aspects and are a cyclical development (Namenwirth, 1973, 1987).

Defining factor is the time a policy has not been on the agenda (De Vries, 1996).

The following political process starts with the formulation of new policies. Actors will try to influence the design with input from their own agenda, and to right before the final decision has been made, the actors will continue doing this (Hoogerwerf, 2003, pp. 105-106). David Easton described this political system as the whole of interactions whereby the distribution of values of society have a place (Easton, 1953). After a policy has gone through the political process, the phase of policy formulation sets in. There are eight steps in the formulation of new policies: analysing the assignment before designing a policy, analysing the problem situation, analysing the causes and consequences of the problem situation, formulating the eventual goal, the instrumentation model, designing the policy implementation, weighing the costs and benefits and the eventual formulation of the policy design (Hoogerwerf, 2003, p. 106). The phase of policy formulation often takes place in the governmental organization itself. Taking these aforementioned steps into account helps to realise a policy

formulation that has included all important angels. In that regard the political market has a place in both the formulation, as the decision making phases.

The process of decision-making entails making decisions about the content of government policies (Herweijer, 2003, pp. 129-130). In this phase the following questions are important: (1) what do the competent institutions want to accomplish with the policy? (2) Which efforts do they make to achieve that goal? These questions are to be answered in the political process and voted upon in the final stage of the decision making process. Formally these decisions are solely made by decision-makers, yet in practice these decision-makers are influenced by external sources. The political market, media and city officials can all influence the decision-maker. Deciding upon policy is therefore a combination of deciding upon the most favourable alternative, as well as reaching consensus and realising

legitimacy (Herweijer, 2003, pp. 129-130).

(18)

In the process of policy development the political market model touches upon several phases of the classic policy cycle. In the phase of agenda setting a topic gets picked up by city officials or alderman and turned into a policy proposal. When a policy proposal has been formulated it goes through a political process. In this phase actors will try to influence the proposal with their interests. Once the political market has taken place, the policy proposal can be decided upon during a city council meeting.

CONCLUSION

A theoretical framework provides a particular perspective, or lens, through which to examine a topic.

It deals with approaching the subject of the political markets. More specific, it is an explanation of the theories used to study the political market. The political market itself takes place in the municipalities of the Netherlands. The organization in each of these municipalities is the same.

To perceive the social phenomenon that takes place the IAD-framework helps to divide the political market into smaller pieces of practically understandable function. This framework consists of seven rule types: position, boundary, scope, authority, aggregation, information and pay-off. The goal of the framework is to understand the ways an institution can operate and change over a period of time.

The interaction itself is full of colloquial language and is placed into a specific context by means of social construction theory.

The political market model is part of the policy cycle taking place in Dutch municipalities. The classic policy cycle entails agenda setting, formulation, decision-making, implementation and evaluation.

Each phase has their own processes, which are much debated. In this research the practice of the political market policy cycle and the existing ones can be compared. By describing and comparing the workings of the political markets with the existing theories a new policy cycle heuristic will emerge.

The phases of implementation and evaluation are beyond the scope of the political markets.

(19)

18

CASE 1: ALMERE

The city council process needed to start connecting with the new dynamics in our society - Jan Dirk Pruim²

The city of Almere lies in the middle of the Netherlands in the province of Flevoland. It is the 7th largest city of the country with almost 200.000 inhabitants. At this moment the municipal coalition consist of D66, PvdA, VVD, Leefbaar Almere and CDA. In 2004 the political market was implemented in the municipal organization. From the establishment of the municipality of Almere around 1975 till 2004, a committee system was in place (Huisman, 2004). This chapter describes the development and workings of these municipal changes.

DEVELOPMENT

The committee model exists today in around 2 out of 3 of the municipalities in the Netherlands (Hendriks & Drosterij, 2011). In the committee model there were typically serval committee’s set-up around themes, such as social issues, construction and sustainability (Interview #5). In total there were seven of these committees in the municipality of Almere. Each committee held a meeting once a month, were all related issues to that theme were treated. Since this could entail many issues, it would not be rare that these meetings would last until midnight. City council members were able to talk at length with each other and with the alderman about the issues at hand and come to a decision. This could be an adjustment of the proposal, rescheduling for further discussion, or the subject would be send through to city council for a final decision. The meetings did not seem to stimulate citizen participation since there were so many policy proposals being discussed and meetings would last for many hours (Interview #1).

The role of aldermen and council members changed in 2002, when a judicial change towards dualism caused aldermen to be made to occupy themselves with governing, whilst city council member were put in the role of monitors. Dualism was to give citizens more opportunities to participate in the policy making processes (Dick Hanemaayer, 2008). Based on these changes the registrar of Almere began working on a different model, which made it more appealing for citizens to participate and could also be more efficient for municipal organization (Huisman, 2004). More efficient, in this case, means obtaining the maximum result in a shorter timeframe. This model was named the political market.

In the committee model policy formulation was the responsibility of city officials and the registrar’s office. Since all policy proposals were discussed, it was not necessary to influence this process

beforehand. This changed with the introduction of the political market. From then on out a presidium had to decide which topics were political market material and which policy proposals went directly on to city council as ‘hamerstukken’. Some subjects are, for example, mandatory judicial rules and are immediately sent through to decision making. City council members of all political parties are represented with one person in the presidium (except for the chairman of the political party).

Alderman, city officials and the registrar’s office provide the presidium with information about proposed policies. The presidium consists of five members and makes the decisions on which subjects get a place on the political market. This judgement is arbitrary.

2 Registrar of the municipality of Almere and responsible for developing the political market

(20)

When the city council feels that a subject should not have been sent to the decision-making phase, but should have been discussed in a political market, they then have the option to send the subject back to the presidium. In practice this has not occurred (Interview #5). Examples of political market policy topics in the municipality of Almere are: city maintenance and long term investment strategies.

After the decision has been made to discuss a policy proposal, the registrar’s office provides all with relevant documents. This is done through the intranet and the website of the municipality. If the information is not complete or not understandable, council members can ask for more or re-written documents. In the figure below an illustration of the meeting table of the political markets in Almere.

Figure 4: Meeting scheme Almere

The formulation of policy in Almere starts with the alderman and city officials working out a policy proposal. From then on out it can be influenced by input from city council members and citizens in a political market. The city council in Almere has political market meetings every Thursday evening.

Citizens of Almere are welcome to join these meetings and at the meetings citizens can collect information, or supply it. The meetings are video-recorded and can be watched online. The political market of Almere has two official goals, these are:

- Giving insight in the local political process for citizens;

- To take policy decisions in an efficient, careful and recognisable manner (Huisman, 2004).

WALKTHROUGH

The political markets in Almere are held at city hall, which is located in the city centre. The lobby is a spacious room. There is a poster of the political market being held, yet it gives minimal information about where you need to go. To get to the political market you have to go to a secured door, up with an elevator and down a corridor. There are five rooms available for the political markets (carrousel):

the red room, the white room, the blue room, the green room and the city council chamber (plenary room). The last room is by far the largest room, since this is also the room where city council

meetings usually take place. The colour of the room is not related to a specific topic, although

according to Blumer (1969) this could be considered a type of interaction. The security and location of the rooms are not stimulating for potential participants. Citizens are not stimulated to attend the political markets, since there are almost no facilities available for them to make it easy to participate.

A political market in Almere (carousel session) starts with the chairman opening the session. He or she welcomes the people present and the people watching the internet feed. He then states the session type and which policy is about to be discussed.

(21)

20 If there are representatives from institutions, they are allowed to speak first and have approximately five minutes to do so (observations #5-8). If they take longer, the chairman usually makes a comment to say that five minutes have passed and the speaker should conclude their input. Afterwards the chairman asks if there are questions for this person. If this is not the case, and if there are no other citizens or representatives who wish to speak, he moves on to the city council members to take their turn. In most cases he starts with the person sitting on the right of himself. It moves on from there.

City council members take this opportunity to formulate questions for the alderman present. If all city council members have had their say the chairman allows the alderman to speak. The alderman states the opinion of his college and answers any questions raised by the council members. In this session- type city council members and citizens have the opportunity to ask questions to the alderman responsible for the policy field proposal at hand.

The chairman manages the discussion by saying who can speak and when. Various carousel sessions can be held in different rooms at the same time. After the carousels sessions are over, another type of session starts. In the ‘debate’ and ‘decision making’ sessions, decisions are made about policy subjects discussed in the political market the week before (Huisman, 2004). These types of sessions are held in the plenary room (city council chamber) and are more focused on the debate between city council members and aldermen, although the same formal rules apply.

Figure 5: Session types in Almere

In this action arena of the political market, there are six available positions. This is a set of participants [single individuals or corporate actors]. There is a chairman, a representative of the registrar’s office, an alderman, a city official, council members and citizens. This last position can also consists of representatives of institutions. The actual participants holding these positions are chosen on the basis of specific knowledge or because they represent a group of local citizens.

The participants have access to different information [types and kinds of information and information channels available to participants in the action situation]. All actors related to the municipality, and the non-citizens have access to the information system of the municipality. Here all the relevant information, in the form of policy documents, is directly available. Citizens can access this information through the municipality’s website, although this is far more restricted in amount of documents.

The political market in Almere consist of three phases: ‘carrousel’, ‘debat’ and ‘besluitvorming’, which take an hour each. All three session types can be handled in one evening (separately), yet normally it is one session type in one evening per subject per week. The carrousel is the session type where opinions can be formed, in the following phase there is room for debate and eventually a final decision can be made in the last political market session type. In a carrousel session it is not required for all plenary members to be present. The session types are not announced beforehand to the public. The political markets do not last longer than one hour, no final decisions are made in the carrousel and debating session types and the speaking time of the participants is monitored by the chairman. Citizens cannot speak for longer than five minutes. According to Ostrom these are the scope rules of the political market arena; the requirements or criteria that exist for the final outcome from the action situation.

Political Market

Session Types Goal Location

Carrousel Gathering ideas Separate rooms

Debate Debating about the opinions formed by political parties

Council chamber Decision-making Making a decision about the subject, has to be

validated by city council Council chamber

(22)

During a political market interaction is a key-component. Debate between council members, alderman and citizens has the possibility to influence the proposed policy. An alderman can commit to adjustments informally through an amendment, or a formal adjustment can be issued by city council through a ‘motie’.

These actions a participant in a position can make, are the authority rules according to Ostrom (2005).

In Almere the main discussions took place between the city council members and the alderman (Interview #5). The interaction of each position, or more specifically, the person actually filling that position, leads to an allowable set of actions and the function that maps actions into realized outcomes [aggregation]. The payoff for the alderman can be an increase of his or her reputation in Almere and the action situation itself. The table hereunder provides a quick overview of this.

Position Authority Payoff

Council member

Has the opportunity to ask [monitor] the policy making process going on in the political market and can call for an amendment, a motie or a re-

scheduling of the topic

Increase of his/her standing among peers, and reputation among voters

Aldermen Answers questions from council members and citizens about the topic at hand

Increase in legitimacy of policy plans and reputation Citizens Can voice their opinions for five minutes per

person

Voicing concerns, gathering information

Chairman Manages the session by giving participants an opportunity to speak, keeping the time and call for a break

Increasing the standing among peers, and reputation in the constituency

Registrar Makes a written summary of the session and is a source of information and continuity

Seen as a capable employee

City official Has expert knowledge about the policy topic being discussed and aids the alderman with this

knowledge if needed

Seen as a capable employee

Figure 6: Authority and payoff rules in the Political Market of Almere

When the debating has taken place, the subject can be moved to the stage of decision-making. The carrousel and/or debate political market session type the week after the one held can be used to make a decision [by majority voting] then in the decision-making political market session type. This is what decision-making session type is used for. After this phase the policy can be implemented and evaluated.

POLITICAL MARKET ANALYSIS

In this sub-chapter the analysis of the observations is described. The roots of political science, and especially comparative politics, lie in study of institutions. Much of the study of institutions has been grounded in the description and analysis of formal institutions, generally in a legalistic and manner (Apter, 1965; Peters, 2001).

Although supplanted to some extent by more individualistic approaches to politics, as theoretical developments in institutionalism have progressed, the study of institutions has returned to prominence. In all institutional studies, however, the assumption is that institutions do matter.

Political markets in Dutch municipalities: an interpretive policy study of the cases Almere and Hengelo