Search results

Purpose – Based on a case study of citizens’ summits in Amsterdam, this chapter examines competing aims bound up in attempts to create an in-between space where participants struggle to obtain a sense of belonging against the background of (non)diversity.

Methodology/Approach – A qualitative case study approach is used based on participant observation, informal talks with participants, and interviews with the summit organizers.

Findings – A citizens’ summit can be seen as an in-between space where narratives of citizens should dominate instead of (local) governmental rhetoric. Citizens´ summits create a voice for citizens who are normally less heard in the public debate. To what extent this can be achieved depends on how a summit enables a diversity of participants to practice dialogue, create common ground and share ownership of ideas, problems and solutions. Our findings provide insight into contested belonging within the democratic system in the Netherlands and elsewhere.

Social Implications – We suggest that belonging, space and diversity affect social boundaries between those in the electoral democratic system and those participating in citizens’ summits. Focussing on these can lead towards more inclusive democratic systems for all.

Originality/Value of the Paper – Citizens’ summits are often seen as a democratic tool that supplements the electoral democracy. This study looks at the interactions between participants, revealing much about the functioning of deliberative space in citizens’ summits. We also focus on the issue of participant diversity and how senses of belonging include or exclude sections of society.

In this chapter, I reflect on the foundations of the “fair policing from the inside out” approach to identify elements that may complement and refine this theoretical framework.

I address the question of how fair policing can be achieved from a multidisciplinary perspective. Insights and empirical evidence from criminology, psychology, management, and political science/public administration are used to theorize the relationship between internal and external procedural justice.

Both the theoretical framework itself and the conceptual model that has been derived from it are refined. In total, four aspects are elaborated: (1) I stress more explicitly the potential mediating role of moral alignment with citizens; (2) I point more explicitly at the potential mediating role of trust in supervisors and moral alignment with supervisors; (3) I hypothesize that strain/stress may mediate the relationship between internal and external procedural fairness; and (4) I hypothesize several links between mediators.

This chapter contributes to the challenge of theorizing the origins of fair policing. It aims at widening the scope of police research.

This chapter concludes the book by addressing the complexities and challenges associated with smart cities. Despite the widespread enthusiasm and progressive policies surrounding smart cities, navigating this world remains a desirable yet complex challenge. Drawing on existing literature, this final chapter serves as a synthesis of the key points covered throughout the book and offers practical guidelines for navigating the landscape of smart cities. This chapter provides valuable tips and insights for both citizens and policymakers, recognizing their pivotal roles in shaping the future of smart cities. Additionally, it delves into the current challenges faced by smart city initiatives and discusses potential future directions. Emphasizing the need for ongoing adaptation and innovation, this chapter highlights the importance of overcoming obstacles and capitalizing on opportunities in the rapidly evolving digital age. By offering a comprehensive overview and practical recommendations, this chapter aims to equip readers with the knowledge and tools to navigate the complexities of smart cities effectively. It concludes the book on a forward-looking note, emphasizing the dynamic nature of smart city development and the continuous need for adaptation and innovation.

Purchasing a home is the largest expenditure many people will make during their lifetime, as well as their greatest source of wealth. There is a homeownership gap between natives and immigrants well documented in the literature. I examine the determinants of homeownership, the value of purchased homes (a measure of potential housing wealth), and the equity owned for those who have purchased a home (a measure of actual housing wealth) for immigrants and natives. When immigrants are separated by citizenship status the homeownership gap between natives and immigrants is shown to be a gap between natives and non-citizen immigrants. Immigrant citizens have ownership outcomes as good or better than natives. Further, the gap reflects a problem in ownership, brought about by age and income distributional differences, not in value or equity for homeowners. All immigrants are predicted to have higher home value and home equity than natives.

In this paper I argue that the liberal problem of religion, which defines religion in terms of dogmatism or opaque justifications based on ‘revealed truth’, needs to be rethought as part of a broader problem of dialogue, which does not define religion as uniquely problematic.

Habermas argues for religious positions to be translated into ‘generally accessible language’ to incorporate religious citizens into democratic dialogue and resist the domination of instrumental rationality by enhancing ‘solidarity’. I contrast this with Rowan Williams’ and Gadamer’s work.

Williams conceptualises religion in terms of recognising the finitude of our being, rather than dogmatism or opacity. This recognition, he argues, allows people to transcend the ‘imaginative bereavement’ of seeing others as means. Using Williams, I argue that Habermas misdefines religion, and reinforces the domination of instrumental rationality by treating religion as a means. I then use Gadamer to argue that the points Williams makes about religion can apply to secular positions too by recognising them as traditions subject to finitude.

This is original because it argues that the liberal problem of religion misdefines both religion and secular positions, by not recognising that both are traditions defined by finitude. To reach, dialogically, a ‘fusion of horizons’, where religious and secular people are understood non-instrumentally in their own terms of reference, will take time and not trade on immediately manifest – ‘generally accessible’ – meanings.

While the Affordable Care Act (ACA) promised to reduce inequalities in insurance coverage between Latinos and non-Latinos by expanding coverage, it also excluded a large portion of noncitizen immigrants. Past research has demonstrated that among Latinos, further inequalities have developed between citizens and noncitizens after the ACA took effect, but it is unclear if this pattern is unique to Latinos or is evident among non-Latinos as well. I use data from the 2011 to 2016 waves of the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) (n = 369,386) to test how the relationship between citizenship status (native citizen, naturalized citizen, or noncitizen) and insurance coverage changed after the ACA, adjusting for health, demographic, and socioeconomic factors. I disaggregate the analysis by ethnicity to test whether this change differs between Latinos and non-Latinos. The analysis finds that after the ACA, naturalized citizens across ethnic groups moved toward parity with native citizens in health insurance coverage while the benefits of the ACA for noncitizens were conditional on ethnicity. For non-Latinos, lacking citizenship became less disadvantageous for predicting insurance coverage while for Latinos, lacking citizenship became even more disadvantageous in predicting insurance coverage. This bifurcation among noncitizens by ethnicity implies that while the ACA has strengthened institutional boundaries between citizens and noncitizens, this distinction is primarily affecting Latinos. The conclusion offers considerations on how legal systems of stratification influence population health processes.

This chapter examines how citizen journalism affects perceptions of legitimacy among local residents and police officers.

Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews with residents and police officers.

Local residents are mostly willing to obey police commands, but a lack of trust in the police and fear of retaliation hinder willingness to cooperate with the police. Citizens’ willingness to follow police orders is mostly a way for them to end the encounter as quickly as possible so the contact will not extend for a prolonged period of time and cause even more serious consequences. Citizens have recorded the police in the past when they witnessed officers not following proper procedures. The police view citizens recording them as a form of defiance and while this makes policing challenging, police officers interviewed still hold high levels of self-legitimacy, most likely due to their organizational and occupational culture. Recording the police has emerged as a way for citizens to challenge police authority and legitimacy during encounters.

While recording the police has increased with recent technological advances, little empirical research has examined its impact on policing and police-community relations. This study connects three critical issues in policing – technology, citizen journalism, and police legitimacy – by assessing the impact of recording the police on police legitimacy in the eyes of the public and police officers. Not only does this study fill our gap in knowledge on citizens recording the police, but it also furnishes valuable implications for policy and future study.

Public participation in policy-making can play a fundamental role in improving effectiveness via two mechanisms: strengthening the alignment between public needs and proposed measures, and increasing public consensus (and compliance) about them. It is, therefore, particularly relevant to foster public participation in sustainable mobility planning at the urban scale, as strongly recommended by the European Union, not only to avoid protests and resolve conflicts but also to find the best solutions for the city. Among many different tools and methodologies for implementing public participation, Living Labs have also shown great potential in enhancing the co-creation of strategies and measures for achieving sustainable mobility for both passengers and freight.

Through the analysis of the participatory process carried out by the municipality of Rome to support the definition of the Sustainable Urban Mobility and Logistics Plans, this chapter explores different involvement levels, tools and strategies in this field, with a particular focus on the innovative Logistics Living Lab developed in this city. This also contributes to filling a gap in the literature on how and to what extent citizens could or should participate in city logistics planning. The results of the analysis highlight that, despite these efforts, citizen participation in planning urban logistics is still a challenge that deserves additional effort and resources to be properly enhanced and improved and that a Living Lab offers great potential to meet this challenge. In turn, this case study could help policy-makers to identify solutions for more effective and acceptable measures to addressing city logistics and the externalities it generates.

This chapter examines the role that Citizens United v. FEC (2010) has played in shaping the current system of election spending in the United States. In Citizens United, the Court determined that individual rights to speech and expression can flow into the corporate entities they join. This chapter argues that the Court’s holding serves to redirect the focus of accountability away from those who seek to sway election outcomes through massive election spending and toward any efforts by government to regulate that type of spending. The practical result has been to allow for the creation of new organizations that can take in unlimited amounts of money while also effectively hiding the source of funds from disclosure. By muddying the waters of disclosure, these new entities – Super PACs and dark money organizations – lower the ability of citizens to maintain accountability over the electoral system. Finally, this chapter examines ways to encourage greater disclosure and accountability in government after Citizens United.