This paper describes how an urban commons is established on the Amsterdam market square Plein ’40-’45, to explain how an experimental learning environment can be a living lab for improving collaborative governance arrangements. We detail how this improvement is facilitated by an experimental learning environment that engages stakeholders in a process where practical solutions are developed and systemic obstacles are addressed and redesigned simultaneously. Our study is guided by the research question: How can an experimental learning environment develop practical solutions as a means to address systemic obstacles and improve collaborative governance arrangements?
LINK
Now, that the European cities are overcoming the recent economic challenges, they accelerate the development of major housingschemes to accommodate their growing urban population. Amsterdam for instance, sets out to construct 50,000 new homes by 2025. Parallel to this, the City Council presented a new regeneration and urban optimisationprogram in 2017, to reinforce existingneighbourhoods with relatively weak socio-economic status. If these housing policies are to maximise on opportunities, they need to anticipate the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Climate Agreement, and local socio-environmental challenges, into a single cohesive, sustainable solution. Currently, literature indicates that large scale spatial developments, have a tendency to move away from social and ecological ambitions during the course of the planning process. Moreover, ambitions tend to be short term “fixes” where they could be striving for long-term systemic solutions. What is needed, are practice proven comprehensive development strategies tosecure pathways for inclusive and integrated development. Those strategies are spatial and programmatic governance arrangements. Employing a comparative analysis method, we follow and compare the redevelopment of three deprived boroughs across Amsterdam. In collaboration with communities, we are able to construct a “Design Thinking” approach for urban spatial development, using different types of arrangements. This is in reflection and collaboration with the municipality of Amsterdam and a wide variety of skilled experts. The arrangements are tested in practice, following a plan-do-check-act cycle. The research project takes an in-depth look at the Amsterdam case and presents the first set of arrangements for planning more cohesive, urban spatial development and the preliminary strategies we see emerging.
This book fills an important gap in the sport governance literature by engaging in critical reflection on the concept of ‘good governance’. It examines the theoretical perspectives that lead to different conceptualisations of governance and, therefore, to different standards for institutional quality. It explores the different practical strategies that have been employed to achieve the implementation of good governance principles. The first part of the book aims to shed light on the complexity and nuances of good governance by examining theoretical perspectives including leadership, value, feminism, culture and systems. The second part of the book has a practical focus, concentrating on reform strategies, from compliance policies and codes of ethics to external reporting and integrity systems. Together, these studies shed important new light on how we define and understand governance, and on the limits and capabilities of different methods for inducing good governance. With higher ethical standards demanded in sport business and management than ever before, this book is important reading for all advanced students and researchers with an interest in sport governance and sport policy, and for all sport industry professionals looking to improve their professional practice.
