Why Content Marketing is a Commitment Not a Campaign

Most marketers today understand the potential power of content to engage potential customers. However, many still underestimate the commitment required to deliver content that their target audience will discover and truly value. Consumers today are exposed to more online content than ever before, so it’s even more challenging to rise above the noise. In order compete in this new digital environment, brands need a long-term content strategy. Free Actionable Bonus: Looking to elevate your content strategy? Get our our complete guide to creating a content strategy, plus a free content planning template and a list of 30+ places to distribute content Content Marketing is Not Advertising Many companies still treat online content as an ad campaign, but the goals of content marketing are completely different. If you expect instant results from online content, you’re approaching it in the wrong way, and this will ultimately harm your brand. Content marketing takes commitment; marketers shouldn’t think about it like an ad campaign. The Problem With Ads The trouble with throwing money at online advertising is that there’s no long-term value for consumers. Ads may deliver short-term gains, but they don’t give consumers the same long-term benefits as quality content. Consumers are no longer comfortable with being interrupted as they search for information online. Ads are a distraction; they remind us of traditional mass media advertising when brands try to convince us to buy things we don’t really want. Unless you run a company with an unlimited ad budget, the most cost-effective way to engage consumers is through content marketing. It gives power to brands of any size to inspire and connect with consumers in a less intrusive way, but in a way that still drives potential leads along the sales funnel toward a sale. In contrast to advertising, content marketing also has the power to develop brand advocates. A loyal following of people who enjoy your content are much more likely to trust your brand and talk about it to others. You may get a sales spike with an ad, but brand advocates can help your business grow for years to come. To remain competitive, modern marketers are abandoning marketing campaigns in favour of constant communication, because consumers want to read or view content when it suits them. They’re searching for solutions to their problems at all hours of the day, from locations all over the world. They want to find answers when they’re ready, and they expect a mix of content, from social media content to more in-depth content like white papers and case studies. As a content marketer, you need to make sure you have a diverse mix of content online, ready and waiting for your next customer. Building Relationships According to Google’s Zero Moment of Truth study, 88 percent of consumers research before they buy, consulting an average of 10.4 sources. So it’s important to start building a body of content that reaches your target audience on the right platforms. The more time potential leads spend engaging with your content, the more knowledge they gain, and they begin to see your company as a credible resource. In time, leads will be ready to take further action, whether it’s downloading gated content or making a call to sales. You have to become the go-to company for knowledge, expertise, and practical solutions. When you build these relationships, the hottest leads will come to you. This route to converting leads may take longer, but in the long run it significantly drives down conversion costs. Patience Rewards Committing yourself to a long-term content strategy is like setting up a savings account; the value may not look like much in the early days, but after a few years you begin to see the impact of your investment. Instead of just looking at sales figures, look at how your older pieces of content are performing in terms of social engagement, search engine rankings, website traffic, and brand loyalty; over time, you should start to see an increasing return on your initial investment. Commit to Content Marketing for Long-Term Success If you want to see the best results from content marketing, you have to commit to it. Don’t worry if you don’t see great results immediately; just focus on delivering valuable content to your audience on a regular basis. American Express’ Open Forum is a great example of a brand doing content marketing right. Its platform enables professionals to share their knowledge and ask for advice, with a team of employees managing conversations and providing information and guidance. It provides value to users without selling their product directly. But helping one user is enough; others will find the advice useful and the effect multiplies over time. You have to be prepared to invest more time in planning your content strategy, but delivering content that really connects with your target audience will help your business over time by decreasing the cost per each conversion. As a marketer, your choice is simple: do you want to solve problems consumers have, or interrupt their online experience with ads? Do you need quality content to support your content marketing? Constant Content connects you with thousands of professional writers able to create articles, ebooks, product descriptions and other assets to tell your brand story, drive SEO and win sales.

Hell-Heaven Essay Example

Hell Hell-Heaven Paper Hell-Heaven Paper Laura Anderson English 102-3 Dr. Spence September 14, 2011 Lost and Found Love They say it is better to have loved and lost, than to never have loved at all. But, what about a love that one must hide and keep secret? Or what about a love that you didn’t even know was there? In â€Å"Hell-Heaven† by Jhumpa Lahiri, Boudi, a Bengali-American woman is trapped in a loveless marriage. She discovers the loyalty, comfort, and fondness that goes with growing old with another person. Through great friendship and bond, heartbreak and lost love, Boudi discovers that there is more than handholding and giddiness in a marriage. According to Usha, Boudi’s daughter and the narrarator of the story, there was not a lot of love between her parents. Their marriage was an arrangement made in order to keep their parents happy. They had nothing in common, no emotional bond, and were complete strangers before they were married. The only thing that Boudi was grateful for in their marriage was that she did not have to live in the country with her in-laws and their rules. While walking around the streets in Cambridge one afternoon Boudi is approached by a fellow Bengali, who was new to America. He was invited back home with Boudi and Usha to have a proper Bengali meal, and from then on he was a member of the family. Adopted into the family as an older brother-like to Boudi and an uncle to Usha, Pranab Kaku offers an emotional bond that is not seen nor felt from Boudi’s husband. Boudi and Pranab Kaku had many things in common, came from the same neighborhood in Calcutta, and had even shopped in the same local stores. Boudi began to look forward to his visits and would even change clothes, brush her hair, and make extra special meals. Often Pranab Kaku would take Usha and Boudi for rides and they would pack a picnic. They formed an emotional bond in which Boudi had never shared with another man before. These outings would be deemed inappropriate had Usha not been with, but it is clear that Boudi was in love with Pranab Kaku. Usha claims, â€Å"He wooed her as no other man had.. needing her†¦in a way my father never did. † (P. 642). Although Boudi never proclaims her love for Pranab Kaku until the end of the story, her love is evident when she has jealous tendencies when he starts bringing another woman around. Pranab Kaku starts bringing an American woman around and Boudi is very judgmental about her. She always insisted that the relationship was never going to last. She tells Usha, â€Å"In a few weeks, the fun will be over and she’ll leave him,† (P. 642). Boudi is very traditional in her Bengali ways, so while she knows she will never be with Pranab Kaku, she doesn’t want him ‘screwing’ up his life with an American woman. She would rather see him with a proper Bengali woman. Pranab seeks approval for his girlfriend, but Boudi does not voice her opinion, except to her friends right before the two of them get married, â€Å"She will leave him†¦He is throwing his life away† (P. 645). Pranab Kaku slowly drifts away after staring his own family. Boudi and her family get the occasional update until Debra (Pranab Kaku’s wife) calls and tells Boudi of a divorce, and Pranab Kaku’s unfaithful tendencies. It was then that Boudi has a realization of the love that her and her husband share. They had grown old together and when their house emptied and it was left to the two of them, their fondness of each other improved. They took care of each other when they were sick and had a mutual respect for each other. Boudi never had to worry about being taken care of or her family breaking up. She had eventually come to peace with broken heart after Pranab Kaku got married and found a new kind of love in her own marriage.

Iterature comprehension Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Iterature comprehension - Essay Example Robert Lee Frost’s The Road Not Taken is a poem about the contemplation of two different possible outcomes of travel down two divergent roads in the woods. When the traveler is first viewing his choices, he notices that the road down the first path is clear to see: â€Å" And be one traveler, long I stood, And looked down one as far as I could, To where it bent in the undergrowth;† The other path, the one our traveler chooses, â€Å"Because it was grassy and wanted wear† it turns out may not be as different because â€Å"the passing there, Had worn them really about the same†. The contemplation of the two paths, on a literal level, has to do with what the traveler can see and not see on down the road from the vantage point at the beginning of the journey. One path is widely tread and clearly seen. The other one that is unseen, unclear and unknown is the one the traveler chooses. But it is also with this choice that the traveler knows he is ultimately forsa ken the other. After all, as he says, â€Å"Yet knowing how way leads on to way, I doubted if I should ever come back.† ultimately face when we choose one course in life over another. The poet is telling us about the power of free will, that we no longer live under the age of determinism and pastoral control thus we are free to take our own path in life, which in The Road Not Taken, is the one that others have not. I don’t think that Frost is advocating a specific position in this poem. I just think that he is just showing vs. telling the reader that we exist in a time where we have the power to choose one course in life over another. Thus the lesser traveled path is not always the better path, it is simply the one that is lesser known. The path that has fewer unforeseen consequences at the outset is not greater or lesser, it is simply unknown. I think another misconception that is easy to make about the poem is that the poet is sad or full over regret over the path not taken. â€Å"I shall

Cognitive Development In Early Childhood Education Research Paper

Cognitive Development In Early Childhood Education - Research Paper Example This paper declares that cognition of every child tends to be different from another. This means that the level at what one child tends to perceive will be quite different from another child having the same age and circumstances. This merely means that the capability of each individual is different from another. Therefore comparing cognition f one child to another is practically useless as that would only undermine confidence. The only way to overcome this problem is that one needs to critically evaluate the child's way of learning, capabilities and social interaction and then device a way to deal and nurture the cognition in accordance with the child's pace of development. This essay makes a conclusion that cognition is an essential feature of a child's development. It gives a child the capability to understand the world that surrounds him, develop his perception about various things and finally build up his stance on the things. Cognition is a major area of concern which at times is neglected especially when it comes to the lower class as they usually do not spend much time and the required attention on the cognition of their child in the early years which causes them to suffer eventually. Cognitive development in early years of education is also essential because during early childhood a child is developing various concepts which he implements and executes throughout his life if at this point his concepts are clear and has a targeted sort of thinking therefore then many problems can be countered which a child having weak cognition might suffer from.

Is democracy making gains in Asia C.Q. Researcher, July 24, 1998, vol Research Paper

Is democracy making gains in Asia C.Q. Researcher, July 24, 1998, vol. 8, issue 27 - Research Paper Example Economic liberalization has caused setback to democratization 2. Corruption and poverty cause hindrance to growth of democracy 3. Negative impact of war on terrorism affect democratization 4. Instability in the democratic infrastructure prevent stable democracies 5. Tradition-bound societies resist change 6. Expectations focused on â€Å"Asian values† did not materialize in a big way There is a widespread belief in the West that Asia is a region where democracy has not yet taken roots. But the truth is that the Asian countries have given the world the best ideas and values, which have helped democracy progress world over. Democracy, though in its primitive form had been a familiar notion with Asians because the ethical values that the religions of Asia (Budhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam) proclaim, have been almost the same as democracy (1). The democratic implication of the cultural diversity of Asian countries is some thing that the West finds difficult to understand. Wi th so many cultures and languages integrated as one nation, almost every country in this region is a great model of cultural pluralism (2). The colonization of the Asian subcontinent by the British Empire had its pros and cons for the nations of Asia, in terms of democracy (3). Colonization opened up new channels, which were to bring in, new ideas of equality and democratic governance from Western renaissance to Asia (4). All the same, the colonization process destroyed the inherent social fabric of these countries that had a different kind of cultural tolerance and coexistence built into it (5). And this was the tragedy that occurred for the democracy in Asia. But changes are visible. It is through an evolving synthesis of economic progress, community oriented development and the strengthening human rights movement in Asia that democracy is making gains in this region. Literally, the meaning of the word, democracy, is â€Å"people rule† (6). And the primary definition of dem ocracy can be, â€Å"a freely elected government† (7). As Mosley has suggested, the problem that democracy always will have to face and tackle is, the fact that, â€Å" ‘people’ will have many different interests, all clamouring to be heard and acted upon† (8). In Asia, as said above, the cultural diversity is greater than any other region and hence the clamoring at its peak. But there can also be a second definition for democracy, which says that democracy is a â€Å"government by a simple majority† (9). While refuting the arguments of Samuel Huntington regarding the clashes of civilizations, Schmiegelow has pointed out the role of the rising middle class in the democratization process in Asian countries (10). Quoting Henry Rowen, Schmiegelow has also introduced another approach towards the same subject, which says that the economic growth in these countries has contributed to the democratization process (11). The problem with these two approaches has also been described by Schmiegelow by citing two contrasting examples- the case of Singapore which is very rich but not accepted as a liberal democracy by the world and the case of Burma which is very poor but inherits a very strong democratic movement (12). All these discussion throw light upon the amazing diversity of Asian democratic experience, which can be understood from the following words of Brian Bridges and Lok-Sang Ho: When we view the Asian scene, we can see a vast range of democratic polities, from the huge but

Barriers to Dutch Infrastructural Project Planning

Barriers to Dutch Infrastructural Project Planning Interactive planning of Dutch infrastructural project A case-description of Mainport Schiphol and the A12 national expressway Interactive Planning of Sustainability 1. Introduction Since the beginning of the ‘90s, the implementation of new infrastructural projects in The Netherlands became increasingly problematic. Related environmental issues had a lot of societal attention. The Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, responsible for maintaining a high quality of mobility in the Netherlands, identified three major problems with earlier attempts to solve the infrastructural problems; little social acceptance for new projects, procedures for realizing new projects took too long, and the proposed solutions were not really original and often ‘more of the same’. For solving these problems, this Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management proposed a change from top-down decision making to a more open and interactive form of policy making for planning, developing, and implementing new infrastructure (Enthoven and de Rooij, 1996). With interactive policy making, the main goal is to make more creative and effectiv e plans, by involving all stakeholders like citizens, (local and/or national) governments and experts. For this paper, 2 cases are selected, related to a Dutch infrastructure issue and dealt with on an interactive way; Mainport Schiphol near Amsterdam and the A12 national expressway near The Hague. The first one is selected because of its elaborated description in Susskind et al. (1999), its high degree of complexness and the fact the outcomes were fairly positive, the second one is selected also because of its suitable description in Glasbergen en Driessen (2005), but with a more straight-forward problem definition and its positive outcomes. Discussing these two Dutch cases, we will focus on four critical issues, related to interactive planning and often discussed in literature: Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge. Although more critical issues can be defined, like Roles op participants, Modes of evaluation and Use of outcomes by policy makers, only these four are chosen because of the fact that these are clearly discussed in the selec ted case-descriptions and these seemed to be crucial for the success of these cases. Chapter 2 will discuss each critical issue shortly. Chapter 3 will discuss the two cases in the light of the four different critical issues, and chapter 4 will give a conclusion. To structure this research the following research question is formulated: How do the four critical issues (Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge) contribute to the rate of success of 2 infrastructural cases in The Netherlands (the Schiphol case and the A12 national expressway)? 2. Critical Issues This chapter will elaborate a bit more about what is actually meant with the four different critical issues: Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge. 2.1 Participant selection The question of which parties to involve is answered by a set of four considerations that should be taken into account when selecting the participants (De Bruijn et al., 2002). Firstly, parties with blocking power in the decision-making are important. Involving these parties in the process may keep them from using their blocking power in ways that are unforeseen. Secondly, parties with productive power should be part of the process. These parties will actually have to implement the decisions that are taken, and can influence the decision making with their control over the productive resources. Thirdly, parties that have an interest in the decision-making should be considered. These are parties that do not have substantial power in the decision making process (like blocking power or resources), but nevertheless are confronted with the outcomes of the group process and therefore can provide important information and moral considerations. Finally, this moral aspect of decision-making ca n by a reason to invite certain parties to join the process. Moral and ethical considerations can be important to embody the voice of those who are affected by the potential decision, but are not invited to the process for different reasons (De Bruin, 2002). 2.2 Power and access One of the key goals of interactive policy making is that it should reduce the influence of dominant elites and enable the less powerful groups to give input. Those parties or actors, who do not have access to formal decision-making processes or who cannot exert enough influence by the way of discussion and negotiation are more likely to initiate legal proceedings. Public’s ability to participate in decisions can be assessed according to three elements (as defined at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992): access to information, access to the decision-making process, and access to redress or change decision. These three elements will shortly be explained below. ‘Access to information’ can be seen as the first foundation of access and also one of the most passive forms of access seen from the perspective of the public. With access to information is meant the ability the public has to easily get access to forms of relevant information in which they are directly or indirectly involved, such as environmental impact assessments, reports from industries about their emissions etc. But one also can think about getting informed about potential relevant activities, which possibly can affect the public’s environment. ‘Access to the decision-making processes’ wants to give the public a more active role. Once this form of access is attained, one can even speak of a certain form of power. One must not focus on only the opportunity to provide input on specific subjects, but also the ability to influence more general decisions, such as the making of new laws or national policies. ‘Access to redress or change a certain decision’ is also related to a form of power, since the ability to change a certain decision gives a citizen the power to influence the decision-making process. This form of access can be translated into making judicial or administrative remedies accessible to the public, when officials fail to do their work in a proper manner (Mock et al., 2003). 2.3 Roles of facilitators The roles that a facilitator can play in group decision processes constitute of consistent packages of specific tasks within the group process combined with a more general ‘attitude’ towards the group members and the process. In literature, three major roles of a facilitator are commonly distinguished: a role as process architect or process manager, a mediating role and a convening role. As a process architect, the facilitator lays down the backbone of the group process. The process should be structured in such a way that all relevant insights from the participants will play a role in the process. Four core principles for designing a group process can be discriminated: openness, protection of core values, speed and substance (De Bruijn et al., 2002). These four ‘core elements of process design’ should be included and safeguarded in any process design in order to satisfy all the participants. The facilitator focuses on the process so that group members can focus on the substance and can suggest different ways of discussing problems, ensuring that all group members can freely express there comments and are free of any abuses of power or personal attack (Susskind et al., 1999). Especially in environmental issues, the interests, values and problem perceptions of different parties may often be far apart form each other. With such large contrasts of interest within the group, a facilitator often is faced with disputes and conflicts within the group process, that are hard to solve with mere changes in the structure of the process. In such case, the role of the facilitator can be very closely related with a mediating role in which the facilitator is mediating between parties, even to establish a general structure of the process. In addition, an external mediator can be asked to solve the conflicts. An external mediator is a neutral person that specializes in solving disputes between different participants in the group process, often using a variety of negotiation techniques and (psychological) methods of reframing problems and solutions (Acland, 1995). In a convening role, the facilitator has a say in which parties should be involved in the group process, and at what roles they will have. The convening role of a facilitator is sometimes not far apart from the role that a facilitator has as a process designer. Proper management of a group decisions process clearly has a very import influence on the effectiveness of that process. The facilitator can influence that process to quit a large extent. The consensus of all group members on the final decision depends for a large part on the level of agreement within the group with the approach that facilitators takes in structuring and managing the process. 2.4 Role of knowledge Knowledge is a crucial ingredient of interactive planning. However, the significance of the use of knowledge depends on one’s view. Over the years, the view on the role of knowledge has changed. The rational actor model has gradually been replaced by adaptive decision and learning strategies interacting with the environment. Before, planning would be perceived as proceeding in an orderly and linear fashion (Friend Hickling, 2005). Today some authors state that knowledge is a result of collective social processes. This implies that knowledge is a social construct, rather than an objective entity. In the new approach, linear progression of the process is seen as unrealistic. Instead, the uniqueness, ambiguity and unpredictability of real world processes are emphasized. With the recognition that planning is an interactive and communicative process, the notion of the interrelationship between expert and experiential knowledge has become more and more crucial. Interactive planning is now seen as ‘organized rituals’ where ‘deliberating participants’ listen to one another, search for new options and learn to find new ways of going on together (Khakee et al., 2000). 3. Case description For a complete description of each of the two cases, see appendix 1 and 2. This section will only discuss the previously mentioned four critical issues related to interactive policy making (Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge), related to the experiences of these two cases. 3.1 Mainport Schiphol Schiphol Airport is situated in a highly urbanized area, and deals with national, continental and intercontinental air traffic. Although its presence is causing many ‘stress’ on its environmental surroundings, the Dutch government wants it to expand, so it can act as a hub for continental and intercontinental air traffic. With this expansion there are two interests at stake: on national level an economic one (because an enlarged Schiphol would increase economic activities), and on regional level an environmental one (because a bigger Schiphol will cause an increase of nuisances of noise, pollution, and safety). These two opposite interests caused a stalemate to occur since the 1950s. In the 1980s, one of the government authorities took the initiative to change the ‘common way of working’ and activated the policy network, to address the issues (Driessen, 1999). 3.1.1 Participant selection The most important actor in this case was the Dutch Government, who made the prefigured decision to expand the airport into an international hub. All other participants had to find their ‘win-win’ outcomes within this context of developmental growth. From the beginning, various government organisations have been involved in the development of Schiphol Airport. The main players are three ministries. The ministry of Transport and Public Works is by far the most important actor, responsible for the economic development of the airport as well as the abatement of noise nuisance. Second, the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment is also involved, responsible for physical planning in The Netherlands and implementing policies regarding the rest of the environmental effects of the activities of the airline industries, namely air pollution, stench and hazard. Finally, the Ministry of Economic Affairs plays and important role, pursuing further economic development in the region of Schiphol (Driessen, 1999). Lower tiers of governments involved were the province of North Holland, responsible for environmental policy and planning for the region, and the municipalities surrounding the airport, both benefiting (by increased employment and tax-incomes) and enduring the aggravation (caused by noise, stench, air pollution, and other activities that degrade the environment) of having the airport close by. The municipality of Haarlemmermeer is a special case, because this municipality is authorized to create a land use plan for the airfield. Additionally, two enterprises play a crucial role: NV Luchthaven Schiphol (operating the airport and completely state owned) and KLM (the major Dutch carrier and partly owned by the state) (Driessen, 1999). Because the Ministry of Transport and Public Works occupied a pivotal position, being both responsible for the economic development of Schiphol and the abatement of noise nuisance, it was agreed that noise regulation would be regulated by the Aviation Act, which was under the responsibility of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works. Nevertheless, little actions were made to reduce noise nuisance, because all participants believed that technical solutions would solve all noise-problems in the near future. Because no agreement could be made between these participants on how much the airport should be allowed to grow, or how to tackle the environmental problems, the Dutch government asked the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment to make an integral plan for the Schiphol region, ensuring both economic development as well as environmental improvements. In the following process, a project group and a steering committee were established. The steering committee was comp osed out of all above-mentioned parties, while the project group contained all interest groups. Any party with interest in the case could join the project group (Driessen, 1999). Based on the case-description and related to the four considerations described in section 2.1, it must be concluded that parties with blocking and productive power were strongly involved in the interactive planning process, by joining the steering committee. Other parties with interest were also involved, by joining the project group, but their influence was relatively small. If parties were involved, based on moral considerations, does not become clear from this case-description. 3.1.2 Power and access The three different Governmental agencies (the ministry of Transport and Public Works, the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, and the Ministry of Economic Affairs) with jurisdictional authority over airport expansion, had accepted the mandate for airport expansion, but each with more at stake than achieving this outcome. Interagency rivalry and power played a critical part in the positions the ministries adopted and the coalitions they build during negotiations. The creation of a project group composed of all interest groups and of a steering committee of essential power brokers gave much power to the steering committee alone. From the case description, it does not become clear that the members of the steering committee, who were eventually excluded from the decision-making, were those who could not benefit in a ‘win-win’ situation, or were simply not powerful enough to block or advance progress. Nevertheless, the exclusion of interests cannot lead t o a ‘win-win’ solution and has encountered difficulties building consensus and achieving compliance (Driessen, 1999). Based on the case-description and related to the three elements described in section 2.2, it must be concluded that ‘Access to information’ does not form an obstacle. Perhaps the overload on information and the opposed and contradicting information gave bigger problems. The public was given some access to the decision-making process when they joint the project group, by commenting the ideas of the steering committee. However, the steering committee made all final decisions, so there was certainly no access to redress or change a decision. 3.1.3 Roles of facilitator After the developed deadlock between the initially participants, the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment was made primary responsible for the task of making an integral plan for the Schiphol region, ensuring both economic development as well as environmental improvements. The fact that this ministry had a strong affiliation with environmental issues raised initial suspicion among the other governmental bodies. They wondered whether this ministry would be able to take a neutral position in the ensuing discussions. However, their initial wariness soon gave way to a realistic attitude, and actively joined the process (Driessen, 1999). The Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment designed an organizational framework for the discussion whereby the coordinated approach would be given a concrete form by activating the policy network. With this, the ministry acquired a dual function in the project, because it was the convenor, chair and facilitator of the planning process, and had to secure the input of environmental interest in the decision-making (Driessen, 1999). In the initial stage, the strategy of the project leaders of the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment was to bring the various parties closer together by conducting investigations and exchanging information, assuming that this might contribute to a better understanding and more appreciation for each different standpoint. The was no need for a professional facilitator, because all information was being collected, analyzed, and disseminated in an orderly way, although a professional facilitator could have helped structuring the problem. At the end of this stage, the project leaders formulated a plan, which could not be released because of the rain of criticism it caused (Driessen, 1999). Because of this setback, the project leaders decided to recruit a professional facilitator, with the task not to increase the supply of information, but to let parties sought to digest what they had and to arrive at a decision. From the case-description, it does not become clear if this facilitator had staff support and whether he/she had analytical, problem solving skills. The approach taken by the facilitator was aimed at bringing the main bottlenecks to the fore, in order to reach agreements at least on key points. The approach was characterized by the creation of a strong interaction between the project group and the steering committee. The later reviewed the issues that the project group had pared down in size, and either approved the solutions offered by the project group or send them back to the project group for reconsideration (Driessen, 1999). After this process, the facilitator presented the choices made by the project group and the steering committee to the public. The central aim of this was, to gain social and political legitimacy; the plan was opened up to the public discussion and the reactions were taken into account in the final version. Unfortunately, the public was hardly informed about the process preceding the plan and therefore it was generally received with great suspicion. Adding to this, the public discussion did not proceeded in a coordinated fashion, but each government resorted to its own method of public discussion. At the same time of these public hearings, the facilitator had to focus on the steering committee, because each party could take criticism of the plan as a lever to reopen discussion on subjects already discussed. At the end, the facilitator wrote the final text of the plan, shaping the final agreements also including the difficult topics of a reduction of noise nuisance and hazard (Driessen , 1999). From this description of the facilitator, it becomes clear that the facilitator had both the role of process architect, and mediator. The facilitator designed the entire framework of decision-making and mediated when problems occurred. If the facilitator also had a convening role is unclear. Which stakeholders could join the steering committee was already decided before the facilitator got involved. How actually the project group was formed, stays unclear from this case-description. 3.1.4 Role of knowledge Especially in issues related to airfield, experts disagree on numerous crucial uncertainties. This makes the role of knowledge both important but not of the same tenor. Research plays a key role in these controversies. This relates to research on, for instance, the need to build a new airport or expand the existing one, it may concern the most desirable infrastructure in and around the airport, it may deal with the profitability of operation, it may investigate the economic impact of the airport, or it may consider possible negative effects on the environment. However, this research must never be judged as ‘objective’ and will always play a role in the conflict of interest, expressed in this case, in the frequency of requested ‘second opinions’ (Driessen, 1999). In the case of noise nuisance, it took long time to be acknowledged as a problem and to find a way of calculating the level of distress. In the mid-1960s, a system was developed to measure noise nuisance, but no agreement could be made on how it should be applied. For instance, there was discussion about how to determine the threshold value for maximum admissible noise nuisance. Furthermore, options differ on setting a specific norm for night flights. The disagreement revolves around the degree to which departing and arriving airplanes disturb the sleep of nearby residents, and whether such disruption is detrimental to public health. There was also uncertainty about, the rate air traffic would increase, and the degree to which technical developments in aeronautics could help reduce noise levels by changing the aircrafts design (Driessen, 1999). Therefore, as also stated in section 2.4, knowledge is very important in decision-making processes, but as these processes get more interaction with a broad scale of actors, knowledge becomes more a result of collective social processes and loses its objective entity. From this case-description, it does not become explicitly clear if the decisions were based on knowledge provided by ‘experts’ or that it was formed in an interactive learning process. Implicitly, one could state that the agreement on noise nuisances could only have been established, when such interactive knowledge development occurred. 3.2 A12 national expressway The ease of accessibility of The Hague depends to a large extent on the A12 national expressway. Its final 30 km stretch is marked by many access and exit ramps, and the intensity of traffic in this area has increased dramatically in recent decades. This is partly thanks to the enormous increase in the volume of vehicular traffic, and partly to the proliferation of new urban development locations around The Hague. Much of the traffic is ‘destination traffic’ which enters the city in the morning and leaves at night. As a result of the higher volumes, congestion became a big problem (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). 3.2.1 Participant selection The planning agency initially saw itself as the owner of the problem at stake and formulated a classical solution of road widening. This approach failed because of public resistance and of a budget problem at the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management. Because of this, the ministry stepped back, which un-deliberately created opportunities for other parties to take initiative. The government authorities of The Hague took the initiative to develop a new architecture for interaction among the different stakeholders. They organized a public dialog and a series of workshops involving local politicians and private businesses from the region, resulting in a new definition of the problem, focussing on the underutilization of existing capacity. The role of the planning agency changed from orchestrator of the infrastructure project to a partner in the wider regional consultation on issues of mobility and livability. They also made subsidies available to the business community , enabling them to work out individual, sometimes innovative, mobility plans (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). Before concluding the analysis of participant selection in this case, the fact that there were no objections to the planes made by this interactive planning-process is probably the best evidence that all relevant stakeholders were included in the process. Nevertheless, from the case-description and related to the four considerations described in section 2.1, it does not become clear how all relevant stakeholders were defined, if all parties with blocking and productive power were added to the process, or if parties with moral and ethical considerations were included. 3.2.2 Power and access This case can bee described as a restricted interactive process, because it was intended to promote the cooperation of public authorities with the private sector. Civic organizations and individual citizens were kept informed through a public relations center. The governmental authorities of The Hague decided which stakeholders were included in the process. Despite this fact, no opposition to this project did arise (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). The access to information was well looked after, in the form of the public relations center. They kept civic organizations and individual citizens informed about the plans and progress. More power was not given to the public in this case. 3.2.3 Roles of facilitator In order to link the government agencies (where the plans were developed), and the business community, a ‘godfather’ was appointed. This honour was given to the director of the public transport company in the region, and he served as a contact between the project and the private sector. He kept all relevant firms informed about the development of the project and called these firms to task with respect to their responsibilities for the region’s accessibility, by reminding them that they might be lagging behind other firms in the development of their mobility plans (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). From the case-description, it must be concluded that the government authorities of The Hague acted as a convener, initially selecting the different stakeholders. Facilitating the process and mediating in conflicts were partly done by the ‘godfather’ and partly by the government authorities of The Hague. The precise division of responsibilities does not become clear from the case-description. 3.2.4 Role of knowledge According to this case-description, it was the government agencies of The Hague who decided what knowledge was used in the decision process. The only organization consulted for information was the planning agency, also participating in the planning process (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). Although knowledge is crucial in interactive planning (see section 2.4), the role of knowledge in this case is not very big. This probably has two reasons. One is the relative simple problem at stake (congestion) and secondly the fact that all parties agreed on the content of the relevant knowledge. Nevertheless, the fact that only one party provided the relevant knowledge could potentially have caused major problems afterwards. 4. Conclusion This research started with the question: How do the four critical issues (Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge) contribute to the rate of success of 2 infrastructural cases in The Netherlands (the Schiphol case and the A12 national expressway)? How each criterion added to the success of the case is described at the end of each subsection in chapter 3. Overall, it can be concluded that the success of interactive planning depends on the care each criterion is taken care of. If one of these criteria is neglected, it will be reflected in the outcomes. If, for example, participants are forgotten, power is not distributed evenly, facilitators are not adequate, or knowledge is not as objective as possible, the process will take much longer time and the change of good end-results and thus consensus will diminish. Both cases make clear that solutions were impossible to reach in the traditional way of policy making and that interactive policy mak ing contributed to good end results. Nevertheless, in future comparable processes, more attention should be given to the four discussed critical issues, and probably to the seven mentioned in the introduction. Only than, the rate of success of these kind of processes will increase. References Acland, A.F. 1995. Resolving Disputes without going to Court. London, Century Business Books. Bruijn, H. de, E. ten Heuvelhof and R.J. in ’t Veld. 2002. Process management: Why Project Management Fails in Complex decision making Processes. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Driessen, P. 1999. Activating a Policy Network; The Case of Mainport Schiphol. in Susskind et al., 1999, The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. Enthoven, G.M.W. and A. de Rooij. 1996. InfraLab; Impuls voor open planvorming en creativiteit.Bestuurskunde, Vol. 5, Issue 8, p. 1-8. Friend, J. and A. Hickling. 2004. Planning Under Pressure, The Strategic Choice Approach. Oxford, Buttorworth/Heinemann. Glasbergen, P. and P.J. Driessen. 2005. Interactive planning of infrastructure: the changing role of Dutch project management. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol. 23, p. 263-277. Khakee A., A. Barbanente and D. Borri. 2000. Expert and experimental knowledge in planning. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 51, No. 7, p. 776-788. Mock, G.A., W. Vanasselt, and E. Petkova. 2003. Rights and reality: Monitoring the public’s right to participate. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, Vol. 9, p. 4-13. Suzzkind, L.S., S. McKearan and J. Thomas-Larmer. 1999. The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. London, SAGE Publications. Appendix 1 – Case sheet Mainport Schiphol (Driessen, 1999) 1. Position Initiative: several governmental ministries Time period: 1980-present Level of used policy process: regional/national Phase in policy process: in process 2. Background This case is about plans to expand Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport and the disputes related to it. Schiphol Airport is situated in a highly urbanized area, and deals with national, continental and intercontinental air traffic. Although its presence is causing many ‘stress’ on its environmental surroundings, the Dutch government wants it to expand, so it can act as a hub for continental and intercontinental air traffic. With this expansion there are two interests at stake: on national level an economic one (because an enlarged Schiphol Airport would increase economic activities), and on regional level an environmental one (because a bigger Schiphol Airport will caus Barriers to Dutch Infrastructural Project Planning Barriers to Dutch Infrastructural Project Planning Interactive planning of Dutch infrastructural project A case-description of Mainport Schiphol and the A12 national expressway Interactive Planning of Sustainability 1. Introduction Since the beginning of the ‘90s, the implementation of new infrastructural projects in The Netherlands became increasingly problematic. Related environmental issues had a lot of societal attention. The Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, responsible for maintaining a high quality of mobility in the Netherlands, identified three major problems with earlier attempts to solve the infrastructural problems; little social acceptance for new projects, procedures for realizing new projects took too long, and the proposed solutions were not really original and often ‘more of the same’. For solving these problems, this Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management proposed a change from top-down decision making to a more open and interactive form of policy making for planning, developing, and implementing new infrastructure (Enthoven and de Rooij, 1996). With interactive policy making, the main goal is to make more creative and effectiv e plans, by involving all stakeholders like citizens, (local and/or national) governments and experts. For this paper, 2 cases are selected, related to a Dutch infrastructure issue and dealt with on an interactive way; Mainport Schiphol near Amsterdam and the A12 national expressway near The Hague. The first one is selected because of its elaborated description in Susskind et al. (1999), its high degree of complexness and the fact the outcomes were fairly positive, the second one is selected also because of its suitable description in Glasbergen en Driessen (2005), but with a more straight-forward problem definition and its positive outcomes. Discussing these two Dutch cases, we will focus on four critical issues, related to interactive planning and often discussed in literature: Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge. Although more critical issues can be defined, like Roles op participants, Modes of evaluation and Use of outcomes by policy makers, only these four are chosen because of the fact that these are clearly discussed in the selec ted case-descriptions and these seemed to be crucial for the success of these cases. Chapter 2 will discuss each critical issue shortly. Chapter 3 will discuss the two cases in the light of the four different critical issues, and chapter 4 will give a conclusion. To structure this research the following research question is formulated: How do the four critical issues (Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge) contribute to the rate of success of 2 infrastructural cases in The Netherlands (the Schiphol case and the A12 national expressway)? 2. Critical Issues This chapter will elaborate a bit more about what is actually meant with the four different critical issues: Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge. 2.1 Participant selection The question of which parties to involve is answered by a set of four considerations that should be taken into account when selecting the participants (De Bruijn et al., 2002). Firstly, parties with blocking power in the decision-making are important. Involving these parties in the process may keep them from using their blocking power in ways that are unforeseen. Secondly, parties with productive power should be part of the process. These parties will actually have to implement the decisions that are taken, and can influence the decision making with their control over the productive resources. Thirdly, parties that have an interest in the decision-making should be considered. These are parties that do not have substantial power in the decision making process (like blocking power or resources), but nevertheless are confronted with the outcomes of the group process and therefore can provide important information and moral considerations. Finally, this moral aspect of decision-making ca n by a reason to invite certain parties to join the process. Moral and ethical considerations can be important to embody the voice of those who are affected by the potential decision, but are not invited to the process for different reasons (De Bruin, 2002). 2.2 Power and access One of the key goals of interactive policy making is that it should reduce the influence of dominant elites and enable the less powerful groups to give input. Those parties or actors, who do not have access to formal decision-making processes or who cannot exert enough influence by the way of discussion and negotiation are more likely to initiate legal proceedings. Public’s ability to participate in decisions can be assessed according to three elements (as defined at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992): access to information, access to the decision-making process, and access to redress or change decision. These three elements will shortly be explained below. ‘Access to information’ can be seen as the first foundation of access and also one of the most passive forms of access seen from the perspective of the public. With access to information is meant the ability the public has to easily get access to forms of relevant information in which they are directly or indirectly involved, such as environmental impact assessments, reports from industries about their emissions etc. But one also can think about getting informed about potential relevant activities, which possibly can affect the public’s environment. ‘Access to the decision-making processes’ wants to give the public a more active role. Once this form of access is attained, one can even speak of a certain form of power. One must not focus on only the opportunity to provide input on specific subjects, but also the ability to influence more general decisions, such as the making of new laws or national policies. ‘Access to redress or change a certain decision’ is also related to a form of power, since the ability to change a certain decision gives a citizen the power to influence the decision-making process. This form of access can be translated into making judicial or administrative remedies accessible to the public, when officials fail to do their work in a proper manner (Mock et al., 2003). 2.3 Roles of facilitators The roles that a facilitator can play in group decision processes constitute of consistent packages of specific tasks within the group process combined with a more general ‘attitude’ towards the group members and the process. In literature, three major roles of a facilitator are commonly distinguished: a role as process architect or process manager, a mediating role and a convening role. As a process architect, the facilitator lays down the backbone of the group process. The process should be structured in such a way that all relevant insights from the participants will play a role in the process. Four core principles for designing a group process can be discriminated: openness, protection of core values, speed and substance (De Bruijn et al., 2002). These four ‘core elements of process design’ should be included and safeguarded in any process design in order to satisfy all the participants. The facilitator focuses on the process so that group members can focus on the substance and can suggest different ways of discussing problems, ensuring that all group members can freely express there comments and are free of any abuses of power or personal attack (Susskind et al., 1999). Especially in environmental issues, the interests, values and problem perceptions of different parties may often be far apart form each other. With such large contrasts of interest within the group, a facilitator often is faced with disputes and conflicts within the group process, that are hard to solve with mere changes in the structure of the process. In such case, the role of the facilitator can be very closely related with a mediating role in which the facilitator is mediating between parties, even to establish a general structure of the process. In addition, an external mediator can be asked to solve the conflicts. An external mediator is a neutral person that specializes in solving disputes between different participants in the group process, often using a variety of negotiation techniques and (psychological) methods of reframing problems and solutions (Acland, 1995). In a convening role, the facilitator has a say in which parties should be involved in the group process, and at what roles they will have. The convening role of a facilitator is sometimes not far apart from the role that a facilitator has as a process designer. Proper management of a group decisions process clearly has a very import influence on the effectiveness of that process. The facilitator can influence that process to quit a large extent. The consensus of all group members on the final decision depends for a large part on the level of agreement within the group with the approach that facilitators takes in structuring and managing the process. 2.4 Role of knowledge Knowledge is a crucial ingredient of interactive planning. However, the significance of the use of knowledge depends on one’s view. Over the years, the view on the role of knowledge has changed. The rational actor model has gradually been replaced by adaptive decision and learning strategies interacting with the environment. Before, planning would be perceived as proceeding in an orderly and linear fashion (Friend Hickling, 2005). Today some authors state that knowledge is a result of collective social processes. This implies that knowledge is a social construct, rather than an objective entity. In the new approach, linear progression of the process is seen as unrealistic. Instead, the uniqueness, ambiguity and unpredictability of real world processes are emphasized. With the recognition that planning is an interactive and communicative process, the notion of the interrelationship between expert and experiential knowledge has become more and more crucial. Interactive planning is now seen as ‘organized rituals’ where ‘deliberating participants’ listen to one another, search for new options and learn to find new ways of going on together (Khakee et al., 2000). 3. Case description For a complete description of each of the two cases, see appendix 1 and 2. This section will only discuss the previously mentioned four critical issues related to interactive policy making (Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge), related to the experiences of these two cases. 3.1 Mainport Schiphol Schiphol Airport is situated in a highly urbanized area, and deals with national, continental and intercontinental air traffic. Although its presence is causing many ‘stress’ on its environmental surroundings, the Dutch government wants it to expand, so it can act as a hub for continental and intercontinental air traffic. With this expansion there are two interests at stake: on national level an economic one (because an enlarged Schiphol would increase economic activities), and on regional level an environmental one (because a bigger Schiphol will cause an increase of nuisances of noise, pollution, and safety). These two opposite interests caused a stalemate to occur since the 1950s. In the 1980s, one of the government authorities took the initiative to change the ‘common way of working’ and activated the policy network, to address the issues (Driessen, 1999). 3.1.1 Participant selection The most important actor in this case was the Dutch Government, who made the prefigured decision to expand the airport into an international hub. All other participants had to find their ‘win-win’ outcomes within this context of developmental growth. From the beginning, various government organisations have been involved in the development of Schiphol Airport. The main players are three ministries. The ministry of Transport and Public Works is by far the most important actor, responsible for the economic development of the airport as well as the abatement of noise nuisance. Second, the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment is also involved, responsible for physical planning in The Netherlands and implementing policies regarding the rest of the environmental effects of the activities of the airline industries, namely air pollution, stench and hazard. Finally, the Ministry of Economic Affairs plays and important role, pursuing further economic development in the region of Schiphol (Driessen, 1999). Lower tiers of governments involved were the province of North Holland, responsible for environmental policy and planning for the region, and the municipalities surrounding the airport, both benefiting (by increased employment and tax-incomes) and enduring the aggravation (caused by noise, stench, air pollution, and other activities that degrade the environment) of having the airport close by. The municipality of Haarlemmermeer is a special case, because this municipality is authorized to create a land use plan for the airfield. Additionally, two enterprises play a crucial role: NV Luchthaven Schiphol (operating the airport and completely state owned) and KLM (the major Dutch carrier and partly owned by the state) (Driessen, 1999). Because the Ministry of Transport and Public Works occupied a pivotal position, being both responsible for the economic development of Schiphol and the abatement of noise nuisance, it was agreed that noise regulation would be regulated by the Aviation Act, which was under the responsibility of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works. Nevertheless, little actions were made to reduce noise nuisance, because all participants believed that technical solutions would solve all noise-problems in the near future. Because no agreement could be made between these participants on how much the airport should be allowed to grow, or how to tackle the environmental problems, the Dutch government asked the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment to make an integral plan for the Schiphol region, ensuring both economic development as well as environmental improvements. In the following process, a project group and a steering committee were established. The steering committee was comp osed out of all above-mentioned parties, while the project group contained all interest groups. Any party with interest in the case could join the project group (Driessen, 1999). Based on the case-description and related to the four considerations described in section 2.1, it must be concluded that parties with blocking and productive power were strongly involved in the interactive planning process, by joining the steering committee. Other parties with interest were also involved, by joining the project group, but their influence was relatively small. If parties were involved, based on moral considerations, does not become clear from this case-description. 3.1.2 Power and access The three different Governmental agencies (the ministry of Transport and Public Works, the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, and the Ministry of Economic Affairs) with jurisdictional authority over airport expansion, had accepted the mandate for airport expansion, but each with more at stake than achieving this outcome. Interagency rivalry and power played a critical part in the positions the ministries adopted and the coalitions they build during negotiations. The creation of a project group composed of all interest groups and of a steering committee of essential power brokers gave much power to the steering committee alone. From the case description, it does not become clear that the members of the steering committee, who were eventually excluded from the decision-making, were those who could not benefit in a ‘win-win’ situation, or were simply not powerful enough to block or advance progress. Nevertheless, the exclusion of interests cannot lead t o a ‘win-win’ solution and has encountered difficulties building consensus and achieving compliance (Driessen, 1999). Based on the case-description and related to the three elements described in section 2.2, it must be concluded that ‘Access to information’ does not form an obstacle. Perhaps the overload on information and the opposed and contradicting information gave bigger problems. The public was given some access to the decision-making process when they joint the project group, by commenting the ideas of the steering committee. However, the steering committee made all final decisions, so there was certainly no access to redress or change a decision. 3.1.3 Roles of facilitator After the developed deadlock between the initially participants, the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment was made primary responsible for the task of making an integral plan for the Schiphol region, ensuring both economic development as well as environmental improvements. The fact that this ministry had a strong affiliation with environmental issues raised initial suspicion among the other governmental bodies. They wondered whether this ministry would be able to take a neutral position in the ensuing discussions. However, their initial wariness soon gave way to a realistic attitude, and actively joined the process (Driessen, 1999). The Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment designed an organizational framework for the discussion whereby the coordinated approach would be given a concrete form by activating the policy network. With this, the ministry acquired a dual function in the project, because it was the convenor, chair and facilitator of the planning process, and had to secure the input of environmental interest in the decision-making (Driessen, 1999). In the initial stage, the strategy of the project leaders of the Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment was to bring the various parties closer together by conducting investigations and exchanging information, assuming that this might contribute to a better understanding and more appreciation for each different standpoint. The was no need for a professional facilitator, because all information was being collected, analyzed, and disseminated in an orderly way, although a professional facilitator could have helped structuring the problem. At the end of this stage, the project leaders formulated a plan, which could not be released because of the rain of criticism it caused (Driessen, 1999). Because of this setback, the project leaders decided to recruit a professional facilitator, with the task not to increase the supply of information, but to let parties sought to digest what they had and to arrive at a decision. From the case-description, it does not become clear if this facilitator had staff support and whether he/she had analytical, problem solving skills. The approach taken by the facilitator was aimed at bringing the main bottlenecks to the fore, in order to reach agreements at least on key points. The approach was characterized by the creation of a strong interaction between the project group and the steering committee. The later reviewed the issues that the project group had pared down in size, and either approved the solutions offered by the project group or send them back to the project group for reconsideration (Driessen, 1999). After this process, the facilitator presented the choices made by the project group and the steering committee to the public. The central aim of this was, to gain social and political legitimacy; the plan was opened up to the public discussion and the reactions were taken into account in the final version. Unfortunately, the public was hardly informed about the process preceding the plan and therefore it was generally received with great suspicion. Adding to this, the public discussion did not proceeded in a coordinated fashion, but each government resorted to its own method of public discussion. At the same time of these public hearings, the facilitator had to focus on the steering committee, because each party could take criticism of the plan as a lever to reopen discussion on subjects already discussed. At the end, the facilitator wrote the final text of the plan, shaping the final agreements also including the difficult topics of a reduction of noise nuisance and hazard (Driessen , 1999). From this description of the facilitator, it becomes clear that the facilitator had both the role of process architect, and mediator. The facilitator designed the entire framework of decision-making and mediated when problems occurred. If the facilitator also had a convening role is unclear. Which stakeholders could join the steering committee was already decided before the facilitator got involved. How actually the project group was formed, stays unclear from this case-description. 3.1.4 Role of knowledge Especially in issues related to airfield, experts disagree on numerous crucial uncertainties. This makes the role of knowledge both important but not of the same tenor. Research plays a key role in these controversies. This relates to research on, for instance, the need to build a new airport or expand the existing one, it may concern the most desirable infrastructure in and around the airport, it may deal with the profitability of operation, it may investigate the economic impact of the airport, or it may consider possible negative effects on the environment. However, this research must never be judged as ‘objective’ and will always play a role in the conflict of interest, expressed in this case, in the frequency of requested ‘second opinions’ (Driessen, 1999). In the case of noise nuisance, it took long time to be acknowledged as a problem and to find a way of calculating the level of distress. In the mid-1960s, a system was developed to measure noise nuisance, but no agreement could be made on how it should be applied. For instance, there was discussion about how to determine the threshold value for maximum admissible noise nuisance. Furthermore, options differ on setting a specific norm for night flights. The disagreement revolves around the degree to which departing and arriving airplanes disturb the sleep of nearby residents, and whether such disruption is detrimental to public health. There was also uncertainty about, the rate air traffic would increase, and the degree to which technical developments in aeronautics could help reduce noise levels by changing the aircrafts design (Driessen, 1999). Therefore, as also stated in section 2.4, knowledge is very important in decision-making processes, but as these processes get more interaction with a broad scale of actors, knowledge becomes more a result of collective social processes and loses its objective entity. From this case-description, it does not become explicitly clear if the decisions were based on knowledge provided by ‘experts’ or that it was formed in an interactive learning process. Implicitly, one could state that the agreement on noise nuisances could only have been established, when such interactive knowledge development occurred. 3.2 A12 national expressway The ease of accessibility of The Hague depends to a large extent on the A12 national expressway. Its final 30 km stretch is marked by many access and exit ramps, and the intensity of traffic in this area has increased dramatically in recent decades. This is partly thanks to the enormous increase in the volume of vehicular traffic, and partly to the proliferation of new urban development locations around The Hague. Much of the traffic is ‘destination traffic’ which enters the city in the morning and leaves at night. As a result of the higher volumes, congestion became a big problem (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). 3.2.1 Participant selection The planning agency initially saw itself as the owner of the problem at stake and formulated a classical solution of road widening. This approach failed because of public resistance and of a budget problem at the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management. Because of this, the ministry stepped back, which un-deliberately created opportunities for other parties to take initiative. The government authorities of The Hague took the initiative to develop a new architecture for interaction among the different stakeholders. They organized a public dialog and a series of workshops involving local politicians and private businesses from the region, resulting in a new definition of the problem, focussing on the underutilization of existing capacity. The role of the planning agency changed from orchestrator of the infrastructure project to a partner in the wider regional consultation on issues of mobility and livability. They also made subsidies available to the business community , enabling them to work out individual, sometimes innovative, mobility plans (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). Before concluding the analysis of participant selection in this case, the fact that there were no objections to the planes made by this interactive planning-process is probably the best evidence that all relevant stakeholders were included in the process. Nevertheless, from the case-description and related to the four considerations described in section 2.1, it does not become clear how all relevant stakeholders were defined, if all parties with blocking and productive power were added to the process, or if parties with moral and ethical considerations were included. 3.2.2 Power and access This case can bee described as a restricted interactive process, because it was intended to promote the cooperation of public authorities with the private sector. Civic organizations and individual citizens were kept informed through a public relations center. The governmental authorities of The Hague decided which stakeholders were included in the process. Despite this fact, no opposition to this project did arise (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). The access to information was well looked after, in the form of the public relations center. They kept civic organizations and individual citizens informed about the plans and progress. More power was not given to the public in this case. 3.2.3 Roles of facilitator In order to link the government agencies (where the plans were developed), and the business community, a ‘godfather’ was appointed. This honour was given to the director of the public transport company in the region, and he served as a contact between the project and the private sector. He kept all relevant firms informed about the development of the project and called these firms to task with respect to their responsibilities for the region’s accessibility, by reminding them that they might be lagging behind other firms in the development of their mobility plans (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). From the case-description, it must be concluded that the government authorities of The Hague acted as a convener, initially selecting the different stakeholders. Facilitating the process and mediating in conflicts were partly done by the ‘godfather’ and partly by the government authorities of The Hague. The precise division of responsibilities does not become clear from the case-description. 3.2.4 Role of knowledge According to this case-description, it was the government agencies of The Hague who decided what knowledge was used in the decision process. The only organization consulted for information was the planning agency, also participating in the planning process (Glasbergen and Driessen, 2005). Although knowledge is crucial in interactive planning (see section 2.4), the role of knowledge in this case is not very big. This probably has two reasons. One is the relative simple problem at stake (congestion) and secondly the fact that all parties agreed on the content of the relevant knowledge. Nevertheless, the fact that only one party provided the relevant knowledge could potentially have caused major problems afterwards. 4. Conclusion This research started with the question: How do the four critical issues (Participant selection, Power and Access, Roles of facilitators, and Use of knowledge) contribute to the rate of success of 2 infrastructural cases in The Netherlands (the Schiphol case and the A12 national expressway)? How each criterion added to the success of the case is described at the end of each subsection in chapter 3. Overall, it can be concluded that the success of interactive planning depends on the care each criterion is taken care of. If one of these criteria is neglected, it will be reflected in the outcomes. If, for example, participants are forgotten, power is not distributed evenly, facilitators are not adequate, or knowledge is not as objective as possible, the process will take much longer time and the change of good end-results and thus consensus will diminish. Both cases make clear that solutions were impossible to reach in the traditional way of policy making and that interactive policy mak ing contributed to good end results. Nevertheless, in future comparable processes, more attention should be given to the four discussed critical issues, and probably to the seven mentioned in the introduction. Only than, the rate of success of these kind of processes will increase. References Acland, A.F. 1995. Resolving Disputes without going to Court. London, Century Business Books. Bruijn, H. de, E. ten Heuvelhof and R.J. in ’t Veld. 2002. Process management: Why Project Management Fails in Complex decision making Processes. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Driessen, P. 1999. Activating a Policy Network; The Case of Mainport Schiphol. in Susskind et al., 1999, The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. Enthoven, G.M.W. and A. de Rooij. 1996. InfraLab; Impuls voor open planvorming en creativiteit.Bestuurskunde, Vol. 5, Issue 8, p. 1-8. Friend, J. and A. Hickling. 2004. Planning Under Pressure, The Strategic Choice Approach. Oxford, Buttorworth/Heinemann. Glasbergen, P. and P.J. Driessen. 2005. Interactive planning of infrastructure: the changing role of Dutch project management. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol. 23, p. 263-277. Khakee A., A. Barbanente and D. Borri. 2000. Expert and experimental knowledge in planning. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 51, No. 7, p. 776-788. Mock, G.A., W. Vanasselt, and E. Petkova. 2003. Rights and reality: Monitoring the public’s right to participate. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, Vol. 9, p. 4-13. Suzzkind, L.S., S. McKearan and J. Thomas-Larmer. 1999. The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. London, SAGE Publications. Appendix 1 – Case sheet Mainport Schiphol (Driessen, 1999) 1. Position Initiative: several governmental ministries Time period: 1980-present Level of used policy process: regional/national Phase in policy process: in process 2. Background This case is about plans to expand Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport and the disputes related to it. Schiphol Airport is situated in a highly urbanized area, and deals with national, continental and intercontinental air traffic. Although its presence is causing many ‘stress’ on its environmental surroundings, the Dutch government wants it to expand, so it can act as a hub for continental and intercontinental air traffic. With this expansion there are two interests at stake: on national level an economic one (because an enlarged Schiphol Airport would increase economic activities), and on regional level an environmental one (because a bigger Schiphol Airport will caus

Race :: essays papers

Race When I was a little girl, my best friend's dad was a neurologist. He tricked us with color and number tests and other brainteasers. I was fascinated by how my brain reacted to the games, and ever since, I have wanted to study the brain. Later, as a high school sophomore, I still focused on being a doctor, and that year I was deemed worthy of an internship at a local hospital. So, the following summer, I gave up late mornings and relaxing by the pool to get up early and help doctors at the hospital. I had originally applied for a neurological internship, which the program did not offer, so I was shuffled into working with doctors in the maternity ward and the nursery. Nevertheless, by the end of the first week, I was feeding babies, checking vitals, changing diapers, and rolling them in carriages to their mothers and fathers. Each moment I spent helping the doctors with the newborns, I wondered if I should be an o.b./gyn doctor instead of a neurologist. One morning a few weeks after I began the internship, the doctors told me a mother was to deliver a baby, and she had given permission for me to view the delivery. For awhile the mother tried to deliver, but she was tense; the doctors kept telling her to relax and stay calm for the baby. The tense mother continued trying to deliver, and with the doctor's encouraging words and the heat of the small, boxy room, I became conscious of what I was about to witness and wondered if I could handle it all. Before I could change my mind, a small, smooth head slowly emerged. I discovered what I had expected - I could not take it. Tears filled my eyes along with the healthy newborn baby's. What I had seen, some never see -- including the father who had decided he should stay in the much calmer hallway. As the beautiful baby was carried around from doctor to doctor to be examined and then to the mother's arms, I realized that I did not want to be an o.b./gyn doctor. Residents had warned me that this job must be a passion or one would burn out from stress and constant fatigue, which I definitely felt after watching the birth of a baby. As my internship continued, I helped doctors in the neo-natal care unit.