Participation, Social Cohesion and the Challenges in the Governance Process: An Analysis of a Post-World War II Neighbourhood in the Netherlands

Abstract

In the past 5 years, several scientific articles have been written on the theme of social cohesion in urban neighbourhoods. In most cases this literature focuses on the loss of social cohesion in these areas. In addition, many problems, such as a declining quality of life, physical deterioration, and social isolation have been related to a lack of social cohesion. Another set of articles has increased our knowledge on urban governance. While this work adds considerably to our general understanding of the changing role of the organization of urban social policy and its effects on neighbourhoods, there has been little attempt to date to analyse how policy-makers experience this relationship. This experience is crucial, because it is the basis of policy practice and action. The first aim here is therefore to analyse to what extent policy-makers experience an effect of participation on social cohesion, although the number of participants is relatively low. The empirical findings show that policy-makers do experience a positive effect of participation on the various dimensions of social cohesion. The second aim of the paper is to explain the level of participation by evaluating the governance process. The analyses indicate that the policy-makers face challenges related to the diversity of the population in the participation process, as well as reconciling different needs within decision-making processes.

From cohesion to conflict in participatory forest management: The case of Ouémé Supérieur and N'Dali (OSN) forests in Benin

“…The definitions of the notion of social cohesion proposed by scholars in the field also recognize and share its multidimensional features (Ache and Andersen, 2008;Cradock et al, 2009;Dekker and Van Kempen, 2009;Kearns and Forrest, 2000;Tolsma et al, 2009;Van Kempen and Bolt, 2009;Van Marissing, 2008). Kearns and Forrest (2000) identified five constituent dimensions of social cohesion that take into account those formulated by most of the other authors.…”

“…Social cohesion refers in this case to the relations and interactions that bond together stakeholders involved in the participatory management of a forest and the extent to which each stakeholder category acts for the sustainable management of the forest, relying or not on the support of the others. As the stakeholders involved in participatory forest management often have diverse backgrounds, knowledge, interests and perspectives vis-à-vis the forest, social cohesion between them is neither perfect nor absent (Dekker and Van Kempen, 2009). Rather, participatory processes are arenas of continuous transformation of relationships and responsibilities, of networks and competence, of collective memory and memberships (Aarts and Leeuwis, 2010).…”

“…Advocates of the participatory approach expect participation to contribute to well-informed and justified decisions that will positively affect the life of the stakeholders and be easier to implement than topdown decisions (Dekker and Van Kempen, 2009;Saarikoski et al, 2010). However, they seem to overlook the role of social relations in guaranteeing or impeding the success of the process (GoloobaMutebi, 2005).…”

“…The participatory approach is likely to succeed when its implementation takes into account the social, political and cultural contexts (Golooba-Mutebi, 2005). Thus, social relation characteristics such as social cohesion influence the implementation and results of participatory processes (Cradock et al, 2009;Dekker and Van Kempen, 2009;Van Marissing, et al 2006). The aim of this study was then to understand how social cohesion has evolved between the representatives of the FD and those of the local communities involved in CBNRM in Benin, and to what extent it contributes to the explanation of the collapse of the process.…”

‘We want to be there for everyone’: imagined spaces of encounter and the politics of place in a super-diverse neighbourhood

“…Dutch urban policies often focus on 'problem' neighbourhoods, which are described as lacking liveability and social cohesion due to their ethnically diverse and socio-economically weak population (van Gent, Musterd, & Ostendorf, 2009). These neighbourhoods are then subjected to a multitude of (often small-scale) social and physical interventions, in which resident participation is a key aspect (Dekker & Van Kempen, 2009;Uitermark, 2014).…”