SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İDEALKENT / 2026 / Sayı: 51

The spillover effects of the Right to Challenge model

Right to challenge modelinin yayılma etkileri

Reha Bayansar(Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi)0000-0003-0967-5365
Ringo Ossewaarde0000-0003-3449-1074
Journal
İDEALKENT
Pages
1–15
Publication Date
2026-03-05
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Addressing these issues carefully is essential to ensure that the model is implemented in an inclusive, transparent, and sustainable way.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper explores the social and economic impacts of the relatively new Right to Challenge model in the Dutch context.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This model enables citizens to take responsibility for certain public services that were traditionally managed by local governments, allowing them to be directly involved in planning, implementing, and evaluating these services.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Addressing these issues carefully is essential to ensure that the model is implemented in an inclusive, transparent, and sustainable way.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Right to Challenge · kamu katılımı · yerel yönetişim

Abstract

This paper explores the social and economic impacts of the relatively new Right to Challenge model in the Dutch context. This model enables citizens to take responsibility for certain public services that were traditionally managed by local governments, allowing them to be directly involved in planning, implementing, and evaluating these services. The study highlights that the significance of this model goes beyond legal and technical aspects. It also involves important social elements such as strengthening civic solidarity, enhancing community bonds, building trust, and improving collective administrative capacity. While the Right to Challenge model shows great potential to strengthen the relationship between citizens and local governments and promote participatory governance, it also faces ongoing challenges—such as unequal access to participation, bureaucratic hurdles, and concerns around accountability. Addressing these issues carefully is essential to ensure that the model is implemented in an inclusive, transparent, and sustainable way.

Özet

Bu çalışma, nispeten yeni bir yönetişim yaklaşımı olan Right to Challenge (Kamu Hizmetlerine İtiraz ve Üstlenme Hakkı) modelinin Hollanda bağlamındaki sosyal ve ekonomik etkilerini incelemektedir. Bu model, geleneksel olarak yerel yönetimler tarafından sunulan bazı kamu hizmetlerinin sorumluluğunu vatandaşların üstlenmesine olanak tanımakta; böylece vatandaşların bu hizmetlerin planlanması, uygulanması ve değerlendirilmesine doğrudan katılımını sağlamaktadır. Araştırma, modelin öneminin hukuki ve teknik boyutların ötesine geçtiğini; sivil dayanışmanın güçlenmesi, topluluk bağlarının pekişmesi, karşılıklı güvenin inşa edilmesi ve kolektif idari kapasitenin artırılması gibi önemli sosyal unsurları da kapsadığını ortaya koymaktadır. Right to Challenge modeli, vatandaşlar ile yerel yönetimler arasındaki ilişkileri güçlendirme ve katılımcı yönetişimi teşvik etme açısından önemli bir potansiyel sunsa da, katılıma eşitsiz erişim, bürokratik engeller ve hesap verebilirliğe ilişkin kaygılar gibi süregelen zorluklarla da karşı karşıyadır. Bu sorunların dikkatle ele alınması, modelin kapsayıcı, şeffaf ve sürdürülebilir bir biçimde uygulanabilmesi açısından kritik önem taşımaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bayansar, R., Ossewaarde, R. (2026). The spillover effects of the Right to Challenge model. İDEALKENT, Sayı: 51, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.1850708

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (51)

  1. Anderson, M. R. (2009). Beyond membership: A sense of community and political behavior. Political Behavior, 3, 603–627.
  2. Arnstein, R. S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216–224.
  3. Bakker, J., Denters, B., Oude Vrielink, M., & Klok, P. J. (2012). Citizens’ initiatives: How local governments fill their facilitating role. Local Government Studies, 38(4), 395–414.
  4. Beien. (n.d.). Beien. Retrieved April 10, 2025, from https://www.beien.nl/
  5. Blok, S., van Buuren, M. W., & Fenger, H. J. M. (2023). The public value of citizens’ initiatives: Evidence from a Dutch municipality. The American Review of Public Administration, 53(7–8), 263–279.
  6. Brady, H. E., & Kent, T. B. (2022). Fifty years of declining confidence and increasing polarization in trust in American institutions. Dædalus, 151(4), 43–66.
  7. Commonsnetwork. (2025, March 2). Afrikaander neighborhood cooperative from Rotterdam South visit Amsterdam. Retrieved May 2, 2025, from https://www.commonsnetwork.org/2025/03/02/afrikaander-neighborhood-cooperative-from-rotterdam-south-visit-amsterdam
  8. Delft op Zondag. (2023, October 19). Skatebaan De Middenberm is weer open! Retrieved March 18, 2025, from https://www.delftopzondag.nl/nieuws/algemeen/100381/skatebaan-de-middenberm-is-weer-open-
  9. Driessen, E. (2022). The right to challenge in the Netherlands: The desire to legislate a democratic participation tool. Chemins Publics. (URL provided in source not specified.)
  10. Eom, S. J., & Lee, J. (2022). Digital government transformation in turbulent times: Responses, challenges, and future direction. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101690.
  11. Enserink, B., Maleki, A., & Naber, A. (2014). Good governance and Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation: A cross-cultural perspective on democracy [Conference presentation]. Annual Conference of the International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM), Rome, Italy. Retrieved July 13, 2025.
  12. Gemeente Rotterdam. (2019). Evaluatie Right to Challenge pilots 2017–2019. Gemeente Rotterdam. file:///C:/Users/dell/Downloads/Evaluatie%20R2C%20Rotterdam%202019.pdf
  13. Holum, M. (2023). Citizen participation: Linking government efforts, actual participation, and trust in local politicians. International Journal of Public Administration, 46(13), 915–925.
  14. International IDEA. (2008). Direct democracy. In The International IDEA handbook. International IDEA.
  15. Kurkela, K., Kork, A., Jäntti, A., & Paananen, H. (2024). Citizen participation as an organisational challenge in local government. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 37(1), 124–140.
  16. Latupeirissa, J. J. P., Dewi, N. L. Y., Prayana, I. K. R., Srikandi, M. B., Ramadiansyah, S. A., & Pramana, I. B. G. A. Y. (2024). Transforming public service delivery: A comprehensive review of digitization initiatives. Sustainability, 16(7).
  17. Loeffler, E., & Martin, S. (2024). Citizen engagement. In T. Bovaird & E. Loeffler (Eds.), Public administration and governance. Routledge.
  18. LSA Bewoners. (n.d.). Stichting Beien. Retrieved April 10, 2025, from https://www.lsabewoners.nl/onze-leden/stichting-beien-2/
  19. Luoma-aho, V., Olkkonen, L., & Canel, M. (2020). Public sector communication and citizen expectations and satisfaction. In V. Luoma-aho & M.-J. Canel (Eds.), The handbook of public sector communication. John Wiley & Sons.
  20. Mansouri, G., & Rao, V. (2013). Localizing development: Does participation work? (Politics Research Report). World Bank.
  21. Maskivker, J. (2020). Voting as a duty of common pursuit. Georgetown Journal of Law and Policy, 8(S), 1–15.
  22. Michels, A., & De Graaf, L. (2010). Examining citizen participation: Local participatory policy making and democracy. Local Government Studies, 36(4), 477–491.
  23. Minárik, P. (2020). Participatory budgeting and traditional participation in Czech municipalities. Slovak Journal of Political Sciences, 20(1), 29–47.
  24. Nabatchi, T., & Leighninger, M. (2015). Public participation for 21st century democracy. Jossey-Bass.
  25. Nguyen, H., Drejer, I., & Marques, P. (2024). Citizen engagement in public sector innovation: Exploring the transition between paradigms. Public Management Review, 26(12), 3622–3642.
  26. OECD. (2022). Guidelines for citizen participation processes (OECD Public Governance Reviews). OECD.
  27. Oliveria, D. J. S., & Ckagnazarof, I. B. (2023). Citizen participation as one of the principles of open government. Cadernos Gestão Pública e Cidadania, 28, 1–19.
  28. Onzeijssel. (n.d.). Hoe zeven vrijwillige havenmeesters een jachthaven in Zutphen bestieren. Retrieved May 11, 2025, from https://onzeijssel.nl/verhalen/593/hoe-zeven-vrijwillige-havenmeesters-een-jachthaven-in-zutphen-bestieren
  29. Ossewaarde, M. R. R. (2007). The new social contract and the struggle for sovereignty in the Netherlands. Government and Opposition, 42(4), 491–512.
  30. Ouden, W. den, Boogaard, G., & Driessen, E. (2019). Right to challenge: Een study … aan algemene regulating voor het “right to challenge” en andere burgerinitiatieven in Nederland [Eindrapport]. Universiteit Leiden.
  31. Roovers, D. (2020). Van publieke taken naar publieke doelstellingen. In J. Terlouw, D. Roovers, & P. Schnabel, Uitdagen en uitgedaagd worden: Essays over het uitdaagrecht. Retrieved from https://lokale-democratie.nl/file/download/c6b82292-00b3-4b81-bdae-10b11850d03a
  32. Schepenstraat.info. (n.d.). Right to challenge (R2C). Retrieved March 10, 2025, from https://schepenstraat.info/right-to-challenge-r2c/
  33. Silverman, R. M., Taylor, H. L., Jr., Yin, L., Miller, C., & Buggs, P. (2019). Are we still going through the empty ritual of participation? Critical Sociology, 45(1), 1–16.
  34. Stimson, J. A., MacKuen, M. B., & Erikson, R. S. (1995). Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 543–565.
  35. Taanman, M., Flinkenflögel, N., & Beers, P. J. (2023). Uitdaagrecht geschikt voor de provincie Utrecht? Drift.
  36. Tastedelft. (n.d.). Taste Delft. Retrieved March 12, 2025, from https://www.tastedelft.nl/
  37. Teorell, J. (2006). Political participation and three theories of democracy: A research inventory and agenda. European Journal of Political Research, 45, 787–810.
  38. Terlouw, J. (2020). Overheid, vertrouw de burger. In J. Terlouw, D. Roovers, & P. Schnabel, Uitdagen en uitgedaagd worden: Essays over het uitdaagrecht. Retrieved from https://lokale-democratie.nl/file/download/c6b82292-00b3-4b81-bdae-10b11850d03a
  39. Torfing, J., & Triantafillou, P. (2013). What’s in a name? Grasping new public governance as a political-administrative system. International Review of Public Administration, 18(2), 9–25.
  40. Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland, A. (2016). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795–825.
  41. Türk, H. S. (2006). Election, electoral systems and constitutional choice. Constitutional Jurisdiction, 22(1), 75–113.
  42. Uitdaagrecht. (n.d.). Hoe werkt uitdaagrecht. Retrieved February 6, 2025, from https://uitdaagrecht.nl/hoe-werkt-uitdaagrecht
  43. United Nations Development Programme. (2016). Citizen engagement in public service delivery: The critical role of public officials (Discussion paper). UNDP Global Centre for Public Service Excellence. https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/publications/GCPSE_CitizenEngagement_2016.pdf
  44. Veldhoen, D. L. (2021, December 18). Right to challenge: Bewoners nemen gemeentetaken over. Delft op Zondag. Retrieved March 13, 2025, from https://www.delftopzondag.nl/nieuws/algemeen/95536/right-to-challenge-bewoners-nemen-gemeentetaken-over
  45. VNG. (n.d.). Wat is het right to challenge en waar komt het vandaan. Retrieved February 7, 2025, from https://vng.nl/artikelen/wat-is-het-right-to-challenge-en-waar-komt-het-vandaan
  46. Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2014). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357.
  47. Wampler, B. (2007). A guide to participatory budgeting. In A. Shah (Ed.), Participatory budgeting. World Bank.
  48. Waterrecreate Nederland. (n.d.). Bewoners nieuwbouwwijk Noorderhaven in Zutphen beheren zelf de gloednieuwe jachthaven. Retrieved March 9, 2025, from https://waterrecreatienederland.nl/nieuws/2021/03/bewoners-nieuwbouwwijk-noorderhaven-in-zutphen-beheren-zelf-de-gloednieuwe-jachthaven
  49. Wijkcooperatie. (n.d.). Right to challenge. Retrieved May 1, 2025, from https://wijkcooperatie.org/en/profit/right_to_challenge/
  50. Young, S. L., & Tanner, J. (2023). Citizen participation matters. Bureaucratic discretion matters more. Public Administration, 101(3), 747–771.
  51. 1Twente. (n.d.). Pand bewonersinitiatief Beien officieel geopend. Retrieved May 12, 2025, from https://www.1twente.nl/artikel/2414420/pand-bewonersinitiatief-beien-officieel-geopend