The Usefulness of Interactive Governance for Underground Planning

Abstract

The underground provides many spatial planning opportunities as it offers space for structures, but also functions as a resource for energy. To guide developments and use the capabilities the underground provides, the Dutch national government started a policy process for the Structuurvisie Ondergrond (a master plan). Stakeholders are involved in the policy process because of the many interests linked to underground functions. However, past policy processes related to the underground dealt with lack of stakeholder satisfaction. This article explores a quantitative approach by focusing on (a) statistical testing of four criteria of interactive governance and (b) using said criteria to evaluate the satisfaction of stakeholders in a policy process. This article highlights the usefulness of a more quantitative approach and provides new insights into the relation between interactive governance and the procedural satisfaction of stakeholders. It also provides insights that help to improve interactive governance in terms of process management to achieve greater procedural satisfaction.

How government-public collaboration affects individual mitigation responses to flooding: A case study in Yellow River Delta area, China

“…In contrast, no evidence is found to prove that public awareness of policy information does promote individual mitigation actions; that is, the correlations between public awareness and self-reported preparedness were not significant, as shown in Models 1-4. One possible explanation for this is that the public involvement activities, which are mostly face-to-face occasions, could provide good opportunities for the government to engage directly with individual citizens and thus guide them towards taking responsible actions in a manner that provides a sense of satisfaction to all stakeholders (Mclver et al, 2009;Nouzari et al, 2019). Nevertheless, policy information provided by the government could be hard for the public to understand and may not be what they need in any case (Cannon et al, 2020).…”

Interactive governance for satisfaction measurements: Stakeholder involvement in design processes for flood risk management

“…There are a number of quantitative studies with a large N that used a regressions analysis to determine a statistical correlation between certain independent variables with stakeholder satisfaction as the dependent variable. Each study used different independent variables, for example: equality, openness and influence (Boedeltje, 2009); trust (Klijn, Edelenbos, & Steijn, 2010); network or process management (Klijn, Steijn, & Edelenbos, 2010); stakeholder involvement (Edelenbos et al, 2010); equality, influence, reasonable debate and transparency (Nouzari et al, 2019); participation process characteristics like facilitation and participation format (Ernst, 2019). Some of these studies used procedural satisfaction as the dependent variable like Nouzari et al (2019) and Boedeltje (2009), while in the research of Klijn, Edelenbos, and Steijn (2010), Klijn, Steijn, and Edelenbos (2010), Edelenbos et al (2010) and Ernst (2019) stakeholder satisfaction was an item of the independent variable (for example perceived process outcome or normative process factors).…”

“…As such, the results might differ for other types of projects in other countries, within a different political, environmental and cultural context. Nouzari et al (2019) used the same method introduced in this article to determine a correlation between interactive governance and the procedural satisfaction of stakeholders in a Dutch policy process. Even though a correlation was found in both researches with comparable correlation values, replication in different cases is needed for comparative case study research to determine the general applicability of the findings.…”

“…Second, by using their input for decisions and/or (policy) documents. A more detailed description of the four criteria of interactive governance can be found in Nouzari, Hartmann, and Spit (2019). Evaluation criteria are derived from the four criteria described above from which the assumption of a correlation with the procedural satisfaction of stakeholders is explored.…”

Out of sight � out of regulation? Underground space governance in the UK

“…This will be ensured by deliberation and decision-making, which is based on involving all tiers of government, stakeholders, and NGOs (Government of the Netherlands 2018: 4). The development of the national strategy for the subsurface had already involved a variety of stakeholders with interest in the subsurface (Government of the Netherlands 2018: 18; see also Nouzari et al 2019).…”