Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare holds transformative potential but risks exacerbating existing health disparities if inclusivity is not explicitly accounted for. This study addresses the disconnected discussions on inclusive medical AI by developing a comprehensive framework, PREFER-IT. This framework is based on the outcomes of a five-day transdisciplinary co-creation workshop that involved 37 experts from diverse backgrounds, including healthcare, ethics, law, social sciences, AI, and patient advocacy. For this workshop, we used design thinking and participatory methodologies to develop a framework for realising inclusive medical AI. We identified three key challenges for realising inclusive medical AI: integrating the lived experiences and stakeholder voices across the AI lifecycle, designing data collection practices that promote fairness and prevent inequalities, and fostering regulatory frameworks to uphold human rights and promote inclusivity. The analysis of participants’ perspectives informed the development of eight key thematic clusters of PREFER-IT: Participatory and co-design approaches (P), Representative and diverse data (R), Education and digital literacy (E), Fairness (F), Ethical and legal accountability (E), Real-world validation and feedback (R), Inclusive communication (I), and Technical interoperability (T). These elements were mapped across structural layers of AI (humans, data, system, process, and governance) and the AI lifecycle to guide inclusive design, development, validation, implementation, monitoring, and governance. This framework fosters stakeholder engagement and systemic change, positioning inclusion as a guiding principle in practice. PREFER-IT offers a practical and conceptual contribution for how to include ethical, legal and societal aspects when aiming to foster responsible and inclusive AI in healthcare. Author Summary Artificial intelligence (AI) is being used more and more in healthcare to improve diagnosis, treatment, and personalised care. However, if not designed carefully, these technologies can unintentionally increase existing inequalities and exclude certain groups from their benefits. In our study, we brought together experts from healthcare, ethics, law, social sciences, and patient advocacy to explore how AI in medicine can be made more inclusive. Over five days, we worked together to identify key issues and come up with practical solutions. We focused on three main areas: 1) Ensuring diverse voices are heard during the development of AI tools; 2) Making data collection fair and representative; and 3) Creating regulations that protect human rights. From the discussions of the workshop, we created the PREFER-IT framework, which outlines eight key principles for inclusive AI: P articipatory and co-design approaches R epresentative and diverse data E ducation and digital literacy F airness E thical and legal accountability R eal-world validation and feedback I nclusive communication T echnical interoperability This framework helps guide developers, policymakers, and healthcare professionals in creating AI systems that are not only effective but also fair and respectful of all users. Our work emphasises the importance of involving patients and communities in shaping the future of AI.

Having a job is important for the well-being and inclusion of people with limited capability for work (LCW) due to physical and/or mental disability. This study explores salutogenic mechanisms that contribute to work-related sense of coherence (Work-SoC) of employees with LCW, i.e. perceiving their work in nature as manageable, comprehensible and meaningful. Semi-structured interviews (26 in total) were conducted with employees with LCW, employee supervisors, job coaches and foresters, all working in nature management. Interviews were held at four worksites of a governmental organisation in the Netherlands that provides permanent jobs for people with LCW. Employees with LCW contributed to the design and analysis of the study as co-researchers. Thematic analysis was used and member checks were carried out on preliminary findings. We identified six salutogenic mechanisms that contribute to nature-based Work-SoC of employees with LCW: (i) having constructive working relationships, (ii) experiencing structure and clarity, (iii) receiving practical and emotional support, (iv) support in the creation of meaning, (v) experiencing and learning in practice and (vi) physical activity and (absence of) stimuli. Identified mechanisms can create a positive effect when leveraged, thereby boosting (new) salutogenic mechanisms. Our findings illustrate that nature-based work can provide resources that promote Work-SoC of employees with LCW through the identified mechanisms. However, employees with LCW, colleagues, supervisors and stakeholders must recognize, mobilize and use these resources to leverage identified mechanisms in order to facilitate health-promoting workplaces for people with LCW. This, in turn, can contribute to sustainable inclusion through enablement.

Neighborhood safety and its perception are important determinants of citizens’ health and well-beingWell-being. Contemporary urban design guidelines often advocate urban forms that encourage natural surveillanceNatural surveillance or “eyes on the streetEyes on the street” to promote community safety. However, assessing a neighborhood’s level of natural surveillance is challenging due to its subjective nature and a lack of relevant data. We propose a method for measuring natural surveillance at scale by employing a combination of street-level imageryStreet-level imagery and computer visionComputer vision techniques. We detect windows on building facades and calculate sightlinesSightlines from the street level and surrounding buildings across forty neighborhoods in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. By correlating our measurements with the city’s Safety Index, we also validate how our method can be used as an estimator of neighborhood safety. We show how perceived safetyPerceived safety varies with window level and building distance from the street, and we find a non-linear relationship between natural surveillanceNatural surveillance and (perceived) safety.

Abstract Many issues do raise fundamental questions about the constitutionality of (non)-intervention from the executive and the legislator. In most cases, it is the government who is primarily responsible and best equipped for addressing these issues in first instance, including the compatibility review, assisted by many internal and external advisory bodies or agencies. For many different reasons, additional scientific research or external constitutional advice on a regular basis is often needed. High Councils of State, advisory councils, commissions and committees or international bodies will then be requested to give advice. Special ad hoc commissions or committees are frequently established in order to give such advice equally. Recent political crises and judicial decisions do raise the question whether or not all this constitutional advice does finally make sense, and if not, why continuing or what can be done better? In order to contribute to answering these questions, this chapter will present an overview and categorization of different kinds and ways of constitutional advice and finally makes remarks about its effectiveness. It will conclude, among other things, that (meta) evaluations on the effectiveness and impact of advice should be strengthened. Besides, maintaining the constitution and thus the rule of law is not only about institutions and formal legal safeguards, but also about maintaining an enabling environment for the constitution and rule of law through the political culture. Self-restraint in the use of powers might be one of the keys to constitutional success.KeywordsActorsadvisory bodiesconstitutionconstitutional advicecultureevaluationfundamental rightsHigh Councils of Statehuman rightsimpactlegislationrule of law

The current paper is based on the use in the practice of the Gateway Review Method in the context of high-risk projects and programs within the Dutch Government. The method has been deployed from a learning perspective and a helping perspective rather than from a controlling perspective. The current article describes the link of project and program management, to networking and relationship management as a process and how the analysis shows that more than half of all projects and programs that have been reviewed are affected.

In recent times a number of discussions have been started about the pro's and con's of the traditional develop methods (Waterfall, Stage Gate) and more contemporary and incremental methods (Agile, DevOps <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sup> ). These discussions are frequently related to themes of controlling risk and dealing with the dynamics of the environment of programs and projects. In this paper results from a literature study are presented in which the traditional approach and the DevOps approach are compared. The comparison is primarily related to such aspects as controlling and mitigation of uncertanties and risks. Especially attention is paid to the balance between the so called hard and soft controls. Working with such approaches as DevOps require a continuous link and communication between all the relevant stakeholders which does allow for improved detection of early warning signals when it relates to risks. DevOps also stimulates an environment where experimenting and learning are facilitated. The paper ends with the conclusion that the DevOps approach pays more attention on soft controls and that applying the DevOps approach correctly needs a fundamentally change in behavior and culture.

The current paper is based on the use in practice of the Gateway Review Method in the context of high risk projects and programs within the Dutch Government. The method has been deployed from a learning perspective and a helping perspective rather than from a controlling perspective. The current article describes the different levels of learning that can be recognized and that have been achieved since the adoption and adaptation to the “ Dutch Approach” of the method, which had led to the Knowledge Enrichment Model (KEM) that thrives on the existence of a knowledge community.

Abstract AimTo classify and describe distributional patterns in apomictic Rubus subgenus Rubus in north‐west Europe and to characterize the major regions by statistically derived character species.LocationNorth‐western Europe, in particular Ireland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany.MethodsWe used twinspan analysis to distinguish hierarchically ordered phytogeographical regions using grid‐based distributional patterns of bramble species, Dufrêne–Legendre indicator species analysis to define character species for the regions, and descriptive statistical analysis of broad‐scale abiotic factors derived from the LANMAP landscape classification for each region.ResultsGrid cells were classified into 114 initial groups and 12 regions (florulas), forming three major bramble territories. Up to 15 indicator species could be assigned to each florula. The florulas in the British Isles are geographically isolated, unlike those on the continent. The florulas differ in minimum temperature in January, mean precipitation in August, and elevation. Although a clear view of the relationship between the bramble flora in the British Isles and the continental flora is obscured by the lack of data from Belgium and France, the major biogeographical patterns coincide with the genetic structure of the genus as published by Sochor et al. (). Other factors forming the basis for the observed patterns are isolation (especially in the British Isles), and arguably also landscape history and landscape patterns.Main conclusionsPhytogeographical patterns in Rubus subg. Rubus are strongly influenced by historical factors and can be traced back to the hybridization of sexual Rubus ulmifolius, Rubus canescens and Rubus ser. Glandulosi especially. Geographical and ecological factors also play a role in the realization of large‐scale patterns, but these factors seem to be closely tied to the history and genetic structure of the genus through inherited ecology from the ancestral species.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to explore to what extent job, organizational, and personal characteristics independently contribute to the prediction of workplace victimization of local government employees in the Netherlands. The existence of interactions between personal and context (job and organizational) characteristics is also explored.Design/methodology/approach– Structured survey data measured the frequency of victimization involving three types of incidents: verbal aggression; threats; and physical violence. Associations with job and personal factors and interaction effects were studied using bivariate and multivariate analyses.Findings– Contact frequency, perceived work stress, and type of job held by local government employees are the strongest correlates of workplace aggression. Self-efficacy in employees’ conflict management skills shows an unexpected positive association with the level of experienced aggression, especially in organizations that have low levels of prevention measures.Research limitations/implications– Because of the cross-sectional design of the study, no definite causal conclusions can be drawn. Common-method bias in the measurements may have led to systematic bias.Originality/value– This study presents an integrated model of correlates of public-initiated workplace aggression toward a population that is understudied: namely, local government employees. It also provides first insights into how job, organizational, and personal correlates of workplace victimization interact in this population.

“De wijkgerichte aanpak van leefbaarheidsproblemen in de aandachtswijken heeft binnen een beperkt aantal jaren na de start geleid tot relatief gunstige ontwikkelingen op gezondheidsaspecten” luidt de voorzichtige conclusie van het URBAN 40 onderzoek.'