avatar Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam Services
  • Location: ZUID-HOLLAND 
  • Founded: 1926-02-27
  • Website:


  • Page 1

    Annual Report 2020 1

  • Page 2

    Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3 2. Organizational Structure ........................................................................................................................ 5 Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 6 3. Output .................................................................................................................................................... 9 Academic Output ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Publications .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Education ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Societal Output ........................................................................................................................................ 13 Events .................................................................................................................................................. 14 Blogposts ............................................................................................................................................. 15 Conference presentations .................................................................................................................... 16 Influencing policymakers and societal contributions ............................................................................ 17 Recognition .......................................................................................................................................... 18 Media ................................................................................................................................................... 18 Grants ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Awarded Grants ................................................................................................................................... 20 Acquired Grants ................................................................................................................................... 20 4. Collaborations ...................................................................................................................................... 23 5. Financial aspects ................................................................................................................................. 25 6. Mid-Term Review and Recommendations........................................................................................... 27 7. Highlights and prospects ..................................................................................................................... 30 2

  • Page 3

    1. Introduction The Erasmus Initiative: Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity (DoIP) was established by the Erasmus School of Law (ESL), Rotterdam School of Management (RSM), the Erasmus School of Philosophy (ESPhil) and the Executive Board of Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR). It is a research initiative that brings together insights from several angles to a topic of increasing academic and societal relevance: letting different groups in society share in growing opportunities to live meaningful and comfortable lives and giving the stakeholders representing them a say in the decision processes. What follows is the annual report of its third year of operation: 2020. 2018 could be characterized as the year of take-off and initial expansion and 2019 as the one of further expansion of the workforce, solidification of the organizational structure and proliferation in academic output and public events. As is commonly known, 2020 was a year of peculiar challenges for people’s private as well as professional lives. DoIP was no exception to this rule. Although in terms of productivity and developmental progress the final result was actually largely satisfactory, it did lead to changes. Several members of the academic team were subject to a high level of work pressure because of the necessity to switch to online courses and/or home teaching for their children. Several PhD students underwent sobriety in their social interactions and lack of variety in their activities with some difficulty. In the end, conversation mostly through online channels is tedious and affects different individuals differently, but few have truly enjoyed working from home for many long months in a row. When it comes to DoIP’s output, changes are mainly reflected in the reduced number and different style of public events; these were allowed in physical form until early March and afterwards took place online. Those that did occur early in the year were quite significant for the future of the Initiative, however. On the 9th of March, two important events took place. In the morning, no less than 22 research associates working at RSM, ESL and ESPhil were inaugurated, all of them working on topics of inclusive prosperity. That afternoon, in the large auditorium of the Erasmus Pavilion, the Centre for Economics and Mutuality, of which DoIP became the academic leg, was established in collaboration with Economic Summit and the International Platform for the Economics of Mutuality. This happened in the presence of three Dutch MPs, several international professors and business leaders and DoIP’s new senior research fellow Bruno Roche. Furthermore, 2020 was the year in which the transfer from ESL to RSM as coordinator of the Initiative became physically apparent to the outside world: the management team and some of the PhD students moved office from the G-building to T4-12 and T4-14 in the Mandeville building. Unfortunately, this move still had limited effect, since many of us were able to use our new offices only incidentally due to COVID- 19 restrictions. Finally, since work processes and procedures continued throughout the year, November saw our mid-term review conducted by five members of an external assessment committee, the encouraging result of which will also be briefly memorated in this annual report. 3

  • Page 4

    As in the annual reports for 2018 and 2019, sections on organizational structure, academic and societal output, finance and prospects for the future will be found in this edition. But apart from those, we added a section on the mid-term review. We hope that below the reader will discover that 2020 was a challenging, but nonetheless productive year! Remi van der Leer, Operations Manager Roel van den Berg, Business Director Martin de Jong, Scientific Director “Letting different groups in society share in growing opportunities to live meaningful and comfortable lives” 4

  • Page 5

    2. Organizational Structure While the organizational structure of the initiative was rapidly expanded during the first two years of its existence, the growth of the team continued at a moderate pace in 2020. Interdisciplinary collaboration on common themes was established within the initiative at the start and resulted in newly formulated research projects. In 2020, two of these interdisciplinary projects were selected for expansion by hiring a PhD candidate for one and a postdoctoral researcher for the other. The “Sustainable Agriculture” project by Alessandra Arcuri and Yogi Hale Hendlin centers around the negative effects of toxic pesticides on the environment and how these are regulated. Daniela Garcia-Caro Briceno joined this project in September 2020 and conducts PhD research on the topic of agribusiness and its alternatives. For the “Values in Finance” project it was preferred to recruit a postdoctoral researcher. This research project in the area of philosophy of economics entails an assessment of finance models and theories through the lens of key theories in various fields of research, regarding scientific values, explanation, and use of models. Eventually Melissa Vergara Fernández was selected for this project and she joined DoIP in March 2020. She focuses on understanding the methodological choices made in the use of financial economics models and the epistemic and practical consequences thereof. Another expansion of the DoIP research team was the result of a new Chinese-Dutch research consortium for which DoIP is the coordinator on the Dutch side. This consortium obtained a substantial research grant from the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research (NWO) and the National Science Foundation China (NSFC) for research on “Inclusive Wise Waste Cities”. More information about this grant can be found in chapter 3 of this annual report. The grant allowed for the recruitment of a PhD candidate and a postdoctoral researcher at DoIP of which the postdoctoral researcher will allocate half of his time to TU Delft. In December 2020 Filippos Konstantinos Zisopoulos and Byron Murphy were hired as respectively the new postdoctoral researcher and PhD candidate. Beside the academic team members that were directly hired and funded by the initiative, scientific director Martin de Jong and core faculty member Lieselot Bisschop supervise multiple PhD candidates who are to a greater or lesser extent connected to the initiative. Four of those are part of the “Inclusive Cities Programme” set up in collaboration with IHS and are worth mentioning by name. These are Sahar Abdollahi, Deary Artayanti Hoesin, Jialong Zhu and Abdulrhman Alsalay. Both Sahar Abdollahi and Jialong Zhu are self-funded and only receive a discount paid for by DoIP on their registration fees at the graduate school. Also part of the “Inclusive Cities Programme” is Negar Noori, who was one of the PhD candidates of DoIP and while awaiting the defense for her promotion, became a postdoctoral researcher at DoIP from the 1st of October. Another new PhD candidate of the initiative is Puck Hendriks, who officially joined the Business and Society Management department at RSM. This was established by means of 50% funding by DoIP. Her research project focuses on the influence of the institutional context on corporate philanthropy. Last but not least, the initiative engaged in an official affiliation with 22 selected scholars from the founding schools of the initiative (RSM, ESL and ESPhil). These “Research Associates” are working on 5

  • Page 6

    topics related to inclusive prosperity, have a track record of active involvement in DoIP’s activities and have impressive academic credentials. This collaboration is advantageous for both the Initiative and the research associates. Sharing networks, joint research and the co-organization of events are among the benefits that both parties enjoy. This will increase the impact of the Initiative and strengthens its interdisciplinary character. Overview The table below provides a full overview off all DoIP members, their respective schools and any particularities regarding contracts or other arrangements. For a detailed description of all individuals, their research interests and contributions to the initiative, please visit the “Team” section of our website. Steering group School Remarks Prof. Fabian Amtenbrink ESL Prof. Pursey Heugens RSM Prof. Ansgar Richter RSM Prof. Suzan Stoter ESL Prof. Hub Zwart ESPhil Advisory Council Prof. Joep Cornelissen RSM All members of the Advisory Council Prof. Evert Stamhuis ESL are also Research Associates Prof. Jack Vromen ESPhil Scientific Director Prof. Martin de Jong ESL/RSM Managing Director Holds a similar position at the Smarter Choices for Roel van den Berg ESE Better Health Initiative Operational Manager Remi van der Leer ESL 6

  • Page 7

    Academic Team Prof. Alessandra Arcuri ESL Dr. Lieselot Bisschop ESL Dr. Yogi Hale Hendlin ESPhil Dr. Conrad Heilmann ESPhil Dr. Emilio Marti RSM Dr. Marta Szymanowska RSM Postdoctoral Researchers Dr. Melissa Vergara Fernández ESPhil Dr. Filippos Konstantinos Zisopoulos RSM Half of time allocated to TUD PhD Candidates Sahar Abdollahi IHS Self-funded Abdulrhman Alsalay IHS Funded through a scholarship from Saudi-Arabia Deary Artayanti Hoesin IHS Funded through a scholarship from Indonesia Lydia Baan Hofman ESPhil Roy Heesakkers ESL Puck Hendriks RSM 50% funded with a grant from DoIP Daniela Garcia-Caro Briceno ESL Aziza Mayar ESL Byron Murphy ESPhil Negar Noori ESL Postdoctoral researcher from 1-10-2020 Maria Carmen Punzi RSM Jiejing Shi ESL 50% funded by Chinese scholarship Heleen Tiemersma ESL Yannick Wiessner RSM Jialong Zhu IHS Self-funded Research Associates Dr. Constanze Binder ESPhil Prof. Flore Bridoux RSM 7

  • Page 8

    Prof. Mathijs van Dijk RSM Prof. Liesbeth Enneking ESL Prof. Michael Faure ESL Dr. Saskia Kohlhase RSM Dr. Menelaos Markakis ESL Prof. Peter Mascini ESL Prof. Sharon Oded ESL Dr. Gijs van Oenen ESPhil Dr. Brian Pinkham RSM Prof. Stefano Puntoni RSM Prof. Dirk Schoenmaker RSM Prof. Tal Simons RSM Prof. Rob van Tulder RSM Dr. Federica Violi ESL Dr. Mirjam Werner RSM Dr. Frank Wijen RSM Dr. Karin van Wingerde ESL 8

  • Page 9

    3. Output DoIP aims to achieve both scientific and societal impact on the basis of interdisciplinary research around the three themes that are described below. Both in academia and society at large its impact will be based on (1) results, (2) use of those results and (3) recognition. Examples of results are articles, books, courses and events. Evidence of use are for instance citations or attendance. Grants, awards, memberships of committees or boards and keynote invitations are all examples of recognition. Clearly, without adequate results it is virtually impossible to generate substantial use, let alone to achieve recognition. On the other hand, even with a convincing body of results, their use and the subsequent recognition of the authors are not automatic. To achieve those, additional effort is needed beyond the academic production per se. At DoIP, we give explicit attention to those aspects as well, bearing in mind that the target audiences in academia and the general public require different approaches. To date, DoIP has been quite successful in producing substantial academic output and in reaching people outside academia who share an interest in the themes we study. In this chapter we briefly outline our scientific output, our societal output, the projects that were supported by our small grants and projects by DoIP members that received support by means of external grants. Leveraging Inclusive Cities For centuries cities have had the potential to provide opportunities for a better life. Often, they are the focal points for economic, social, intellectual and political activities. However, increasing urbanization typically goes hand in hand with rising inequality and exclusion and this is a challenge for cities in both the Global North and South. What can be done at the municipal level to reduce poverty and inequality, raise participation in education, reduce crime and insecurity and increase employment? The typical external partner in our project under this theme will be the City of Rotterdam, including collaboration with the port authority. Also, collaboration with other cities, both nearby (The Hague) and far away (especially in China) are foreseen. While work in this area primarily takes the perspective of possible interventions by the public sector, it will also study how private actors and for-profit initiatives can contribute to improvements. Clearly, this theme has a strong link to the topics covered by the Erasmus Initiative “Vital Cities and Citizens”. Sustainability and Ecological Inclusion Ecological trade-offs can have significant effects on inclusion (or exclusion) through activities that, at least at first glance, quite clearly lead to more prosperity. Industrial agriculture, fisheries and forestry, mineral mining and the petrochemical industry are commonly viewed as contributing to economic prosperity and are therefore protected by strong legal frameworks, despite degrading the environment at the local and global level. Obvious gains from industrial activities and global supply chains, however, are accompanied by substantial and sometimes dramatic losses for widespread communities, erecting barriers to inclusive prosperity. What is needed to create outcomes that are socially fairer and ecologically more sustainable? 9

  • Page 10

    How can global supply chains be transformed so that the benefits are equitably shared, and the environment is respected? In this context, there is also a connection to the Erasmus Initiative “Smarter Choices for Better Health”, especially their work on population health and health equity. Inclusive Financial Systems In our complex society an operational and sophisticated financial system is indispensable. Much of our innovation and development would be impossible without a system that efficiently distributes financing and allows for risk sharing. However, financial markets are also considered by some as culprit of much inequality and many argue that both academic research in finance and actual industry practices have to change drastically if finance is to play a more positive role in society. Is the current financial system helping or does it widen the gap between the rich and the poor? How should finance research and industry practice change to stimulate sustainable investments, corporate social responsibility, or universal access to financial services? How can current and new socio-legal institutions of finance re-orient and regulate investment practices to stimulate inclusive prosperity? At first glance these three themes may look quite diverse. Indeed, Inclusive Prosperity is a broad concept with many aspects that can be approached from various angles, which together are beyond the comprehensive reach of an initiative with DoIP’s size. Obviously, choices concerning the Erasmus Initiative’s focus had to be made that were aligned with the expertise that is available in DoIP’s founding schools and the three themes result from that choice. They have the following in common. Each one deals with the tension between private initiatives and individual behavior that are “oriented” by institutions and regulations. In each area - urban management, agriculture and finance – we study in what way the rules of the game provide everyone a fair chance to prosper and to what extent, under various circumstances around the world, the dice are loaded. Where the latter is the case we try to unravel what is the cause for this systemic bias and aim to conceive recommendations on how things can be improved. Examples of questions are “who are the winners and losers of the rapid urban development in China?”, “Who benefits from the agricultural policies in Europe and the United States and who pays the price?”, “Who prospers under current financial regulations and who takes the burden of the risks and needs to carry the costs when disaster strikes at organizations that are considered too big to fail?”. In their projects our interdisciplinary and multinational team takes a global perspective, comparing cases from around the world, in order to find best practices that can inspire policies elsewhere. In all this we engage with society based on our academic research and share our findings with our students, aiming to trigger debate, stimulating critical questions that bear relevance around the globe, in the conviction that it is better to keep asking questions than to adhere to “answers” that are wrong. 10

  • Page 11

    Academic Output Two main types of academic output can be distinguished: academic publications and contributions to education. Publications Examples of publications in various categories in 2020 are listed below. Articles Arcuri, A. (2020). International Economic Law and Disintegration: Beware the Schmittean Moment, Journal of International Economic Law, Volume 23, Issue 2, June 2020, Pages 323–345, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgaa012 DesJardine, M., Marti, E., and Durand, R. (2020), “Why Activist Hedge Funds Target Socially Responsible Firms: The Reaction Costs of Signaling Corporate Social Responsibility,” in: Academy of Management Journal. Hendlin, Y., Arcuri, A., Lepenies, R., & Hüesker, F. (2020). Like Oil and Water: The Politics of (Not) Assessing Glyphosate Concentrations in Aquatic Ecosystems. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 11(3), 539-564. Li, Y., Taeihagh, A., de Jong, M., and Klinke, A. (2020). Toward a Commonly Shared Public Policy Perspective for Analyzing Risk Coping Strategies, Risk Analysis, 1. Liu, Z., de Jong, M., Li, F., Brand, N., Hertogh, M. and Dong, L. (2020). Towards Developing a New Model for Inclusive Cities in China—The Case of Xiong’an New Area, Sustainability 12 (15), 6195. Noori, N., Hoppe, T. and de Jong, M. (2020). Classifying Pathways for Smart City Development: Comparing Design, Governance and Implementation in Amsterdam, Barcelona, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi, Sustainability 12 (10), 4030, 3. Noori, N., de Jong, M. and Hoppe, T. (2020). Towards an integrated framework to measure smart city readiness: The case of Iranian cities, Smart Cities 3 (3), 676-704, 1. Noori, N., de Jong, M., Janssen, M., Schraven, D. and Hoppe, T. (2020). Input-output modeling for smart city development, Journal of Urban Technology, 1-22, 1. Purchase, D., Abbasi, G., Bisschop, L., Chatterjee, D., Ekberg, C., Ermolin, M., Fedotov, P., Garelick, H., Isimekhai, K., Kandile, N. G., Lundström, M., Matharu, A., Miller, B. W., Pineda, A., Popoola, O. E., Retegan, T., Ruedel, H., Serpe, A., Sheva, Y., Surati, K. R., Walsh, F., Wilson, B. P., & Wong, M. (2020). Global occurrence, chemical properties, and ecological impacts of e-wastes (IUPAC technical report), Pure and Applied Chemistry, 000010151520190502. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2019-0502 Roks, R., Bisschop, L., & Staring, R. (2020). Getting a Foot in the Door. Spaces of Cocaine Trafficking in the Port of Rotterdam, Trends in Organized Crime, thematic issue on Spaces of Organised Crime (guest editors A. Sergi & L. Storti). Online first https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-020-09394-8 11

  • Page 12

    Stout, H. and De Jong, M. (2020). Exploring the Impact of Government Regulation on Technological Transitions; a Historical Perspective on Innovation in the Dutch Network-Based Industries, Laws 9 (2), 11. Wäckerlin, N., Hoppe, T., Warnier, M. and De Jong, W.M. (2020). Comparing city image and brand identity in polycentric regions using network analysis, Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 16 (1), 80-96, 3. Wingerde van, K. & Bisschop, L. (2020) Waste Away. Examining systemic drivers of global waste trafficking based on a comparative analysis of two Dutch cases. Erasmus Law Review, Special issue on legal aspects of corporate social responsibility. Online first http://www.erasmuslawreview.nl/tijdschrift/ELR/2019/4%20(incomplete)/ELR-D-19-00027 Books, book chapters and edited volumes Anttiroikko, Ari-Veikko & de Jong, Martin. (2020). The Inclusive City; Theory and Practice of Creating Shared Urban Prosperity. London: Palgrave Macmillan Arcuri Alessandra and Yogi Hendlin, (eds.) Special Issue: Symposium on the Science and Politics of Glyphosate, 11(3) European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2020, pp. 411-564. Bisschop, L., Strobl, S. & Viollaz, J. (2020). “The disappearing land: Coastal land loss and environmental crime.” In South, N. & Brisman, A. (Eds.). Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology. Second edition. Chapter 35. Routlegde. Herk van, W. & Bisschop, L. (2020). “E-waste in the twilight zone between crime and survival.” In: South, N. & Brisman, A. (Eds.). Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology. Second edition. Chapter 22. Routlegde. Lu, H., Sun, L., De Jong, M. (2020). The Impact of Public and Private Partnerships on the Liveability of Eco-Cities in China’s Pearl River Delta, in: Partnerships for Livable Cities, 81-99, 2020 Valk van der, N., Bisschop, L. & Van Swaaningen, R. (2020). “Where Gold Speaks Every Tongue is Silent: Crime Script Analysis of Illegal Gold Mining in Peru” In Zabyelina, J. & van Uhm, D. (Eds.) Organized Crime and Corruption in the Mining Industry. The Global Rush for Scarce Metals and Minerals. Palgrave. Education Researchers involved in DoIP contribute to education in many ways. This includes teaching in courses that are not specifically devoted to themes associated with DoIP, e.g. courses on research methodology or philosophy of science. DoIP researchers are also involved in the supervision of bachelor, master and doctoral students as they work towards the completion of their thesis. In addition to this teaching, we list below the contributions to courses that are specific for DoIP or cover topics that are closely related to its scope. They are the clearest examples of how the knowledge developed in DoIP’s research projects proliferates into the EUR class rooms. The list reveals that in the three participating schools bachelor and 12

  • Page 13

    master students are taught about issues concerning inclusive prosperity on multiple occasions. The list includes regular bachelor and master courses, minors and an award-winning MOOC. No lectures in the context of the masters honours course “Tackling Inequalities”, which was held for the first time in 2019, were given in 2020, but a new cohort of students was recruited from all of EUR’s schools before the end of the year. Bachelor courses Master courses • Essential Contemporary Challenges in • International Economic Law Philosophy • Special Topics in Environmental • The Climate Crisis: Ecology, Economy & Philosophy: Industrial Epidemics Politics in the Anthropocene • Multidisciplinary dimensions of multilevel • Women in Philosophy legal orders • Public International Law • Responsible Finance and Financial • Human Rights and International Inclusion Economic Governance • Organized Crime • Corporate & White-Collar Crime • Minor: Sustainability • Minor: Alternative Investments • MOOC: “Driving Business Toward the • Minor: Science and Practice for SDGs”1. Transformative Change • Minor: Criminology, the twilight zone between legal and illegal • Honors Programme ESL: Grand Challenges Societal Output To disseminate their results beyond the realm of academia and to trigger and contribute to broad debate about the topics studied, DoIP researchers produce many articles for the popular press, blogposts, position papers etc. Through its own channels, the initiative publishes a monthly blog by one of the DoIP researchers and a monthly interview with one of the PhD candidates. The blogs usually cover topical societal issues, examples of these for 2020 are the Covid pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement. The blogpost by Martin de Jong on the reaction by European countries to Covid in the early days of the pandemic reached more than 25.000 people. Some of the scientific articles listed above also 1 The MOOC, launced in 2019, has won an ‘award of excellence’ from the leading SDG Academy & SDSN Network. 13

  • Page 14

    received significant attention in for instance newspapers and magazines. In previous years, the dissemination of knowledge by the initiative was characterized by a high frequency of conferences and other academic events. Due to Covid, the inauguration of the 22 research associates and the official opening of the Centre for Economics and Mutuality on the 9th of March were the last events organized in physical form by DoIP in 2020. In the brief period during which physical gatherings were possible, we organized five events. At a later stage two more online events followed. Despite the constraints posed by the pandemic, the core faculty members of DoIP continued presenting their work during various externally organized (online) events. Besides public presentations, impact was also generated by directly influencing policymakers who sought for the expertise of the DoIP researchers. In 2020 the work of DoIP members was also publicly recognized in the form of awards and prizes. Even though this cannot be directly labeled as impact, recognition by others is a sign of doing valuable work, potentially generates publicity and could lead to new opportunities. Recognition in the form of received grants will be elaborated on in a later paragraph of this chapter. An extensive overview of the societal output by DoIP in 2020 and other years, can be found on our website, in both the “Events” and “News” section. A selection of examples of these various forms of output are listed below. Events (selection) Positive state obligations concerning fundamental rights and 'changing the hearts and minds' 30 and 31 Jan 2020 | Conference This conference covered (the reach of) positive state obligations in relation to prejudice and discrimination; and addressed these from a multidisciplinary perspective. Corporate governance for sustainability | Dr. Jeroen Veldman 13 Feb 2020 | Lunchseminar In our series of lunchseminars, academics from various fields of research will speak about interesting and relevant topics related to inclusive prosperity. This edition: Dr. Jeroen Veldman. Inauguration Research Associates 9 Mar 2020 | Inaugural Ceremony On the 9th of March, 22 research associates of the Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity Initiative were inaugurated. Center for Economics and Mutuality 9 Mar 2020 | Official Opening The official opening of the Center for Economics and Mutuality, of which the Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity Initiative is the academic arm in the Netherlands. 14

  • Page 15

    Normal is Over - Movie & Presentation by Filmmaker 7 May 2020 | Online Event The Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity Initiative hosted an online screening of the documentary "Normal is Over". Filmmaker Renée Scheltema gave a short presentation and answered questions. The Promises and Pitfalls of Taxing Carbon 1 Dec 2020 | Online Conference Taxing carbon-dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions has been proposed for decades as an effective strategy to reorient supply and demand economics toward environmental sustainability. Blogposts (selection) Why is environmental harm both challenging and promising for in/exclusive prosperity? 17 Jan 2020 | Lieselot Bisschop Environmental harm results from everyday activities and goes hand in hand with exclusive prosperity. It is both a challenging and a promising topic of research. The Shadow of a Black Swan in China 21 Feb 2020 | Martin de Jong Recently the outbreak of a new Corona-virus epidemic, now dubbed Covid-19, has attracted broad media attention. This unlikely but real event is a great human tragedy for thousands and a small human tragedy for millions. It can also teach us a lesson or two on how power relations are reversed and information is processed. Eyes wide shut: Europe’s state of denial in handling the coronavirus 7 Mar 2020 | Martin de Jong Europeans in general and Dutch in particular still seem to believe that the Covid-19 is barely more serious than a flu and hardly poses a threat to the continuity of regular social and economic life. Their governments have so far only undertaken soft measures and their citizens have not adjusted their merry lifestyles. Convenient untruths: the organized self-delusion of going green 7 May 2020 | Martin de Jong The lucky marriage of green movement, capital, energy technology and sophisticated branding has made it possible to dwell in a liveable environment surrounded by all modern amenities and make this dream possible for more and more people. Or has it? 15

  • Page 16

    Black Role Models Matter 16 Jun 2020 | Martin de Jong The Black Lives Matter movement has a major impact all over the world. Martin de Jong is thinking in terms of long-term strategies and practical actions to reduce discrimination. Decolonization as a Statute of Limitations 22 Jun 2020 | Yogi Hale Hendlin Following the resurgence of public indignation against systemic racism in Western societies, Yogi Hendlin states that the expiry date of colonialism has come due, requiring thorough decolonization. On Tomatoes, Racial Capitalism and Barikamà 26 Aug 2020 | Alessandra Arcuri The tomatoes in our supermarkets are often an insult to human dignity. In this opinion piece, tomatoes become the material evidence of a broken economic system, enabled by a troubling web of laws. Care about corporate sustainability? Protect Dutch companies from activist hedge funds! 29 Oct 2020 | Emilio Marti, Roy Heesakkers, Maarten Verbrugh If policy makers care about corporate sustainability, they should limit the influence of activist hedge funds. Activist hedge funds buy shares of companies to make these companies focus on maximizing shareholder value in the short term. Menstrual health must be in government and employer policies 7 Dec 2020 | Maria Carmen Punzi It’s a world’s first: Scotland has greenlighted free tampons and sanitary pads for all women. The Dutch government should follow suit, says Maria Carmen Punzi. Conference presentations (selection) American Finance Association - Annual Meeting 3, 4, 5 January | Marta Szymanowska Poster Session University of Amsterdam - ACIL lecture 24 February 2020 | Alessandra Arcuri International economic law and disintegration: beware the Schmittean moment. 16

  • Page 17

    SecurPorts - Online Workshop 28-29 May 2020 | Lieselot Bisschop Reflection based on study on drugs trafficking via Port of Rotterdam. Doing Science in a Pluralistic Society - Online Conference 17 April 2020 | Conrad Heilmann, Marta Szymanowska and Melissa Vergara-Fernández Sustainable Finance: Narrow and broad SDGs and International Law - Online Workshop 3, 4, 5 June 2020 | Alessandra Arcuri Invited presentation on SDG 12 in International Law. European Society of Criminology – Online Conference 11 September 2020 | Lieselot Bisschop & Yogi Hale Hendlin Finding the planned in planned obsolescence. Methodological challenges in studying corporate environmental crime. North American Hazardous Materials Management Association – Virtual session 22, 23 September 2020 | Yogi Hale Hendlin “Vaping & Return to Retail: Problems and Solutions.” Panel member with the National Stewardship Action Council. Beyond Methods: The Politics of European Legal Research - Online Workshop 22, 23 October 2020 | Alessandra Arcuri Invited Presentation on Dynamics of Exclusion in Law: International Investment as a Case Study. Biosemiotics Gathering – Conference 28 November 2020 | Yogi Hale Hendlin Multi-Pathway Signaling Cascades, Trophic Cascades, and Climate Change. Influencing policymakers and societal contributions (selection) International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) - Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) 2019-2022 | Lieselot Bisschop Member of the panels on Green Criminology and People and the Ocean. 17

  • Page 18

    Industrial Epidemics and the Corporate Determinants of Health – Webinar, organized by the International Federation of Medical Students Association, Netherlands (IFMSA-NL), Dutch ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS), and the Ministry of International Affairs (BuZa) 8 May 2020 | Yogi Hale Hendlin Masterclass on Global Health Diplomacy concerning the COVID-19 crisis. United Nations Organization for Drugs and Crime (UNODC) 15-22 September 2020 | Lieselot Bisschop Member of Expert Panel for review of Education for Justice Module “Forest and natural resources crime”. Recognition (selection) Winner of the Biosemiotic Achievement Award | Yogi Hale Hendlin Best article in the journal Biosemiotics for 2019 Brocher Foundation Fellow | Yogi Hale Hendlin Residency for writing of the monograph “Industrial Epidemics” (July-August), Hermance, Switzerland (postponed until July-August 2022) Media (selection) Mr. (Dutch platform for lawyers) 30 January 2020 | Alessandra Arcuri Wetten dienen vaak het kapitaal Jstor Daily 31 January 2020 | Yogi Hale Hendlin How Conservation Is Shaped by Settler Colonialism: The legal concept of “terra nullius”— meaning “no one’s land”—influenced European colonialism and continues to shape the practice of conservation. NRC 10 February 2020 | Alessandra Arcuri CETA ondermijnt rechtsstaat en energietransitie The BMJ Podcast 10 February 2020 | Yogi Hale Hendlin Big Tan - Is the sunbed industry targeting research? 18

  • Page 19

    Forbes 20 July 2020 | Emilio Marti Increasing Diversity And Profits? Investors Think Companies Can’t Do Both Financial Times 3 August 2020 | Emilio Marti Ethical CSR focus triggers hostile investor activism, study finds De Groene Amsterdammer 12 August 2020 | Lieselot Bisschop Tovenaars met rommel. Onderzoek Fraude en criminaliteit bij afvalbedrijven RTV Rijnmond 20 October 2020 | Martin de Jong We hebben geen mentale weerstand tegen de gevolgen van de pandemie Grants As in 2018 and 2019, we used small grants in 2020 to leverage the work of EUR researchers who are not directly funded by DoIP but perform work that falls inside our scope. In previous occasions these grants were often used to finance the organization of events. Since this was not possible during most of 2020, we received less grant applications. Grants are normally reserved for researchers from the three founding schools (ESL, RSM and ESPhil), are intended to facilitate interdisciplinary research and are preferably rewarded to our research associates as they are not in any other way funded by the initiative. Part of this is our “Young Female Research Associates Support Programme” by means of which we intent to support the younger female research associates. Female academics are still underrepresented within the university and are therefore often overburdened as for instance many committees and councils require a minimum number of female members. With support from this programme, they might for example be able to buy-out some teaching or hire a student-assistant. In 2020 Constanze Binder was the first person to receive support from this programme and more will follow in 2021. Using our support for junior female researchers as a leverage to obtain larger grants is something we encourage. The award for Constanze Binder was part of two larger external grant applications, by means of which she received a total of 300.000 euros. DoIP was therefore willing to increase its own contribution. Another more than noteworthy acquired grant, is the NWO/NSCF grant which was awarded to an international consortium of Dutch and Chinese partners, headed by DoIP in the Netherlands. 19

  • Page 20

    Awarded Grants How much is enough? A moral framework for assessing the freedom to pursue sustainable lifestyles € 40.000,00 | Dr. Constanze Binder (ESPhil) Global natural resources are depleting. A transition away from current economic systems is extremely urgent, but such transitions face a conflict between environmental policies and a core liberal value: non-interference in lifestyles. This is due to lacunae in contemporary liberal thought: preferences are a given, and the impact environmental constraints have on freedom is neglected. This project fills these lacunae through a moral framework for assessing new socio-economic systems; this allows accounting for the constraining effect current societal structures have on preferences, and comparing institutional changes in terms of resources that enhance freedom to pursue valuable lifepaths. Neglected aspects of the capability framework will be developed by employing the literature on overall freedom and freedom-rankings in political philosophy and social choice theory. The theoretical framework is then used in a deliberative poll to identify how far deliberation about sustainable lifestyles may lead to preference changes caused by the current lack of alternative less-resource-intensive lifestyles. European High-Level Expert Group: Regulating Artificial Intelligence € 5.000,00 | Prof. Evert Stamhuis (ESL), Joris Krijger (ESPhil) Financial institutions are relying more and more on algorithms, models and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to make their processes more efficient. There is a lack of concrete legal guidelines for AI systems and legislators are openly struggling with what legislation and enforcement of these systems should look like. In April 2019 the European High-Level Expert Group published guidelines for "Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence", which the Dutch National Bank translated into their own SAFEST guidelines for the use of AI in the financial sector. The question is whether these guidelines align with existing regulations and to what extent these guidelines can be translated into concrete and workable regulation. For organisations who wish to be leaders in the ethical development of AI, the question to this answer is important for both the development of AI and the governance around it. Acquired Grants How much is enough? A moral framework for assessing the freedom to pursue sustainable lifestyles € 300.000,00 - NWO Aspasia Grant: €150.000,00 & EUR Fellowship: €150.000,00 | Constanze Binder See project description under “Awarded Grants” 20

  • Page 21

    Inclusive Wise Waste Cities € 998.909,00 (shared among Dutch partners in consortium) – NWO/NSCF Grant | Martin de Jong Besides DoIP, the consortium consists of Delft University of Technology and the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) in The Netherlands and Beijing University, City University Hong Kong and Tongji University in China. The funding is based on a joint call by NWO and NSFC, which will each support the research in their respective jurisdictions. The main part of the grant from NWO will be used to hire one doctoral student at the EUR and one at the TU Delft, and a postdoc with a dual appointment at both institutions. This project focuses on the adverse environmental impact of the rapid growth of cities, with special attention to management of air quality and waste. Often the poorest inhabitants suffer most from these adverse effects and with our results we aim to make cities more inclusive in this respect. Inclusive Smart City; a Democratic Techno-Driven Urban Policy € 20.000,00 – Timeless Grant, Erasmus Trustfonds | Negar Noori Many leading Smart Cities have already mentioned the ‘inclusive’ policy in their Smart City programs highlighting citizen sovereignty. Nonetheless, this transition appears to be an experimental pathway for them due to the ambiguity of the concept of “Inclusivity” in the Smart City discourse. The primary objective of this research is to enhance an understanding of the concept of inclusion and its criteria in the Smart City discourse. The research ambition is applying the result as a tool for benchmarking Smart Cities, which can assess and improve their transition pathway towards an Inclusive Smart City. To apply the result, we work with cities like The Hauge, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, London, Barcelona, and Dubai. OP-ETH Community € 8.970,00 – Familie Lurvink Fonds, Erasmus Trustfonds | Joris Krijger Artificial intelligence (AI) can rightly be called a digital key technology: it has a broad scope and is already seen as essential in solving societal challenges and creating economic value through the formation of new activities and new markets. With the Policy Document “Beleidsnota Strategisch Actieplan voor Artificiële Intelligentie (2019)”, the Netherlands has decided to contribute to the development of AI and is stimulating collaborations such as the NL AI Coalition (2019) and Kickstart AI (2019). With the interest in the enormous opportunities that AI offers, there is also increased attention for the risks associated with the use of these types of self-learning algorithms such as automated discrimination, violation of privacy or unexplainable decision procedures. Identifying and mitigating these risks is a serious and acute challenge in both science and practice. Despite national initiatives such as ALLAI, there is no pragmatic platform where science and practice partners can learn from each other on a small scale about possible solutions to 21

  • Page 22

    these challenges. Within this project, a start is being made to set up a valorization community with a group of interested project parties around the ethical risks of AI. This "Op-Eth (Operationalizing Ethics) Community" should help both science and practice to develop knowledge and skills in the field of responsible use of AI, by linking academic research to specific use contexts. Food Safety and Sustainability in Globally Integrated Markets: Trends in New Trade Agreements € 3.600,00 – NWO-Visitors Grant | Alessandra Arcuri This grant supported a project in cooperation with Bocconi University and facilitated the visit of Dr. Leonardo Borlini. The coronavirus probably passed from bats to humans in a live animal market in Wuhan. This circumstance brings to the fore the theme of food safety, dealt with in the the Sanitary and Phitosanitary Standards chapters of the international free trade agreements. According to the precautionary principle, if there are well-founded grounds for fearing possible harmful effects on the environment and on the health of humans, animals and plants, but there is no scientific consensus, measures can still be taken to minimize or avoid potential risks. The principle is defended by the European Union and criticized by the other economic powers, which believe it can be used as a protectionist tool. After the coronavirus, it is clear that the EU will have even less reason to change its position on this issue, while the US and China may face the need to accept its wider use and its inclusion in the new preferential agreements yet to be concluded. National regulators will thus have more elbow room to block the import of certain foods on the basis of this principle, without committing an international offence. 22

  • Page 23

    4. Collaborations The Erasmus Initiative for the Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity, like the other initiatives, has been established to realize academic impact through publications and act as a trigger and source of inspiration for the enhancement of scientific performance among academics within Erasmus University Rotterdam as a whole, also those not directly working in or with DoIP. Moreover, it has also been aimed at reaching out to society at large and make a difference and be force for positive change, as the mission of Rotterdam School of Management would have it. While the former objective is primarily secured through strengthening ties with partners within Erasmus University Rotterdam across various schools and particularly within Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam School of Management and the Erasmus School of Philosophy, the latter requires developing active collaboration with organizations beyond the EUR. In the remainder of this section, what was done and realized to promote cooperation with internal and external stakeholders on the topic of inclusive prosperity. Within Erasmus University Rotterdam, two developmental directions for promoting collaboration were followed. Strong effort was put into participation in and coordination with scholars and students within the constituent schools, working on or having links with topics relevant to inclusive prosperity. In 2018 and 2019, this collaboration had not been given official status yet, but on the 9th of March 2020, 22 research associates found within RSM, ESL and ESPhil were officially inaugurated by DoIP’s Steering Group Chair Pursey Heugens and Scientific Director Martin de Jong in an official ceremony. Their appointment is officially for two years with unlimited possibility of extension if and when so wished by both sides. The Initiative is extremely proud to have them and hopes for lasting fruitful collaboration. Their names and respective schools are provided in chapter 2 of this annual report. That same afternoon, the Centre for Economics and Mutuality (CEM) was established as a Foundation in which DoIP and its constituent schools collaborate with the Amsterdam-based Economic Summit (represented by Arleen Westerhof) and the Geneva-based Platform for the Economics of Mutuality, established by former Mars Corporation protagonist Bruno Roche. DoIP would from thereon act as CEM’s academic leg and Prof. Evert Stamhuis as a member of its board. In addition, Mr Roche was also appointed as DoIP’s prominent external research fellow. CEM has as its key objective to help Dutch SMEs become social enterprises in the sense that they adopt economic mutuality as their main principle and act in a stakeholder-oriented mode while accepting that social, environmental and economic self- improvement are mutually reinforcing mechanisms and an exclusively financial orientation is detrimental both to broader society and themselves. In the coming years, we will enact in a variety of research and societal impact-oriented projects within CEM. DoIP also decided to engage in collaboration with Holland’s national coordinator for SDG-1, Marjolijn van Gerven, and establish the so-called Poverty Lab within its midst. The concept of a Poverty Lab is inspired by economics Nobel Prize winner Esther Duflo’s work on pragmatic ways to reduce poverty. EUR’s Poverty Lab will have Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity as its home-base and is aimed at using Rotterdam as a testbed for fighting poverty, establish a soundboard of academics and practitioners in the area and 23

  • Page 24

    play an active role in educational activities to generate awareness, engagement and practical solutions among EUR students. The Poverty Lab can count the Dutch Salvation Army (Leger des Heils) as a strong partner. In addition to the above, the already existing links with the Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS) and the Institute for Social Studies (ISS) were extended. In collaboration with both, we have accepted a number of new PhD students, whom we are jointly supervising. Abdulrhman Alsalay, Deary Hoesein, Sahar Abdollahi, Jialong Zhu (all IHS) and Jiejing Shi (ESL, but jointly with ISS) should be mentioned in this regard. All will graduate within the broader research theme ‘Inclusive Cities’. Collaboration with other external stakeholders within the Netherlands continued without specific formalization. Nonetheless, continued close ties with Royal Philips and the City of Rotterdam could be observed in their prominent role they played in the mid-term review of all three Erasmus Initiatives (VCC, SCBH and DoIP). When the EUR Executive Board invited them in a leading role for the mid-term assessment, they were happy to accept that role and in fact performed it very professionally. We are happy with the constructive role both partners play in our further development and wish to continue our cooperation, formally or informally, in the next few years. In 2019, elaborate collaboration was initiated with a variety of Asian research organizations, with among them National University of Singapore’s Lee Kew Yuan School of Public Policy (LKYSPP), Fudan University’s Institute for Global Public Policy (IGPP) and the Chinese Academy of Urban Planning and Design (CAUPD), especially its Shenzhen Branch. In the case of CAUPD, existing collaboration continued around Jiejing Shi’s PhD project, while with IGPP a new MoU was signed, which can be seen as a prelude to significant staff and student exchange on the topic of global inclusive governance. Collaboration with LKYSPP was also continued and resulted in a number of joint publications and two jointly coordinated special issues, one for the journal Energies and another for Sustainability. DoIP members also contributed an article to an LKYSPP edited volume for Regulation and Governance (to appear early 2021). However, in all above cases, extensive working together was hampered by COVID- 19, although online contact remained vibrant, mostly through Scientific Director Martin de Jong. 2020 was not an auspicious year for exuberant expansion of international (or even to some extent national) collaboration, but that does not mean nothing happened. What existed was maintained and made official here and there and collaborative projects and processes were continued online. It is certainly hoped that in the course of 2021 enhanced levels of national and international mobility will allow for the expansion and intensification we had hoped would happen in 2020. 24

  • Page 25

    5. Financial aspects DoIP is a collaboration between three schools at the EUR, being ESL, RSM and ESPhil. Initially ESL acted as the coordinating school. At the start of 2020 this responsibility was transferred to RSM, to strengthen the sense of joint responsibility, involvement and internal visibility. This transfer included the financial control of DoIP. The smooth transition reconfirmed the commitment of the founding schools to DoIP’s success. We would like to thank Paul Blok, controller at ESL, for regularly providing transparent financial dashboard to the MT during DoIP’s initial years and we very much appreciate that at RSM Tulsi Rahkan is continuing that support in the same spirit. DoIP’s operational budget is based on contributions from the Executive Board and the founding schools (ESL, RSM and ESPhil). The total budget for 5 years, effectively starting in 2018, is close to € 6.5 million. Almost 65% of that will be covered by the Executive Board, in cash (€ 4.2 million). The other part will be covered by DoIP’s three founding schools. Costs are almost exclusively related to salaries and therefore highly predictable once people have been hired. The contributions from the Executive Board and the founding schools have been combined as follows since 2018. From each one of the founding schools, one associate professor (who already worked at the EUR) became involved in the Erasmus Initiative. They are part-time funded by DoIP, for five years. Similarly, the DoIP Initiative covers a fully funded position for an assistant professor (newly hired at the EUR) at each school, for five years since 2018. In addition, five PhD students were hired in 2018 and 2019. Part of their salary costs (40%) is covered by DoIP, the rest is financed by the school that employs them. Since 2019 a few additional PhD students have become involved with DoIP. One of them is fully funded by DoIP, the others only to a much lower extent. In summary, most people currently involved in DoIP were already hired in 2018 and to a smaller extent in 2019, but a few more people joined in 2020. More information about the organizational structure of the initiative can be found in chapter 2 of this report. In the first months of 2020, we hired a post-doc to reinforce the theme on Inclusive Financial Systems. During the summer we obtained a major grant from the Dutch Research Council (NWO), as coordinators of an international collaborative project involving TU Delft and Peking University among others. The project focuses on waste management in urban environments and includes a comparison of practices in cities in China and the Netherlands. The grant allowed us to hire an additional PhD student and another postdoc, thus strengthening the team working on Inclusive Cities. The grant also included a substantial amount for other costs, such as travel, meetings and events. Obviously, 2020 was not the most appropriate year for meetings and events. In the first quarter we still had events and meetings at the usual rate, which is high compared to the other Erasmus Initiatives. In the last week before the first lockdown we for instance held the inaugural event for our associates. However, since the start of the first lockdown in The Netherlands (in March) our expenses for that type of activities obviously decreased. Initially, only 7% of DoIP’s overall budget was allocated to non-salary costs (it also includes the costs for student assistants). During 2020, the actual percentage devoted to other costs became even lower still, due to reduced travelling etc. Because other costs constitute a small part of the 25

  • Page 26

    budget, the effect of this on the overall annual expenses was limited (see the table below). During the final months some of our other expenses were related to co-financing of the start of a Poverty Lab together with the Salvation Army in the Netherlands, which aims to bring together academic knowledge and practical support to provide better relief to the poor. Concerning the table, please note that the 2020 costs for management staff are higher than those in 2019, because the Operations Manager and the Business Director joined during 2019. The higher costs for the (increased number of) PhD students have been explained above. 2017/2018 2019 2020 Total Management € 149.000,00 € 225.000,00 € 260.000,00 € 634.000,00 Core faculty € 226.000,00 € 320.000,00 € 320.000,00 € 866.000,00 Postdocs € 90.000,00 € 90.000,00 Doctoral students € 60.000,00 € 95.000,00 € 210.000,00 € 365.000,00 Other expenses € 16.000,00 € 85.000,00 € 56.000,00 € 157.000,00 Total € 451.000,00 € 705.000,00 € 936.000,00 € 2.092.000,00 Expenses for DoIP since its start With roughly € 2.1 million spent by the end of 2020, € 2.1 million remains of the Executive Board’s original contribution of € 4.2 million, to be spent in the years 2021-2022. Given the current rate of expenditure and assuming that in 2021 and especially 2022 opportunities for events will increase, that amount is fully aligned with DoIP’s current activities and plans. Fortunately, that is not the whole story of DoIP’s finances in 2020. When the Erasmus Initiatives started in 2017, the expectation was that the initial round of funding by the Executive Board would be followed by a second round, covering subsequent years of activity, obviously under the assumption that they would develop according to expectation. Because this has been the case, the conversation about the possibility of that second round of funding started during the second half of 2019. Partly as a result of the positive mid-term review of the Erasmus Initiatives in November 2020, but more broadly based on the positive results thus far, the Executive Board confirmed in the last week of 2020 that it will provide additional funding for all three Erasmus Initiatives: € 3.78 million per Erasmus Initiative, for new activities during the years 2021-2024 (with 2025 as an additional year to use the funds, to accommodate for delays in hiring etc.). We are happy with how the Executive Board demonstrates its trust in our vision and our execution in this way. With the additional funding confirmed we will develop plans for new projects in the next few months, alongside the ongoing activities as described above. This will include joint planning with the founding schools, to make sure that our plans are aligned with their own development. Given the time needed to consolidate this road-mapping and to hire new people, we expect to start our new projects on the basis of the second round of funding around the beginning of 2022. 26

  • Page 27

    6. Mid-Term Review and Recommendations At the core the Erasmus Initiatives are still organizational experiments. At a modest scale they embody an alternative way to organize academic activities, with the primary aims to enhance interdisciplinary work and increase societal impact of results. At the time of the decision to invest in the Erasmus Initiatives, in October 2016, it was not clear if this experiment would succeed and if the money allocated to it would prove to be well spent. Consequently, from the very start of the Erasmus Initiatives the idea was to systematically review their performance after some years and assess their influence. Considering the amount involved and taking into account that the approach of the Erasmus Initiatives was quite new, this intention already made good sense. Even more, for an initiative that aims to increase societal impact it is particularly reasonable to regularly assess if its activities, funded by taxpayers’ money, are effective. While all stakeholders therefore agreed from the start of the Erasmus Initiatives that a review would be a good idea, it was less clear when it should take place. Originally foreseen towards the end of 2018 (i.e. in the middle of the years 2017-2020) it soon had become clear that that would be too early for the assessment of tangible results from the research projects. Instead it was decided in 2018 already that the review would be organized towards the end of 2020. Beyond the date of the review, even less clarity existed concerning its precise nature. Should it be done per individual Erasmus Initiative or combine the three of them in one assessment by a single committee? Should it be based on the standard protocol for research assessments that is used in the Netherlands or not? What should be its emphasis, considering that the work of the participating researchers is already regularly judged in the research assessment of their respective schools? How many days should the review take? How many people should participate in the review committee? Should they be from academia or other parts of society or both? In response to these and several other questions the three Erasmus Initiatives presented a joint proposal for an envisaged review process to the Executive Board early on in 2020. Together they agreed on a light version of the research assessments that regularly take place for all research groups at Dutch universities (normally every six years). This review would be different from the typical one that focuses on a single discipline, because it would assess the three Erasmus Initiatives in one go. Therefore, it would compare a wide range of research from different disciplines and with different traditions. Also, it would emphasize the ability to organize interdisciplinary research and societal impact, as opposed to the quality of individual contributions and the strategy of individual schools in the regular assessments. In short, the review should focus on the added value of the Erasmus Initiatives, based on individual excellence that already exists in the participating schools. Moreover, the review was meant to combine attention for key performance indicators with more qualitative narratives about the effect of the Erasmus Initiatives. Finally, the review was intended as an opportunity to learn and receive recommendations for future development and not so much as a go/no go decision, considering that the decision to renew funding had already been made at that stage. Soon after the decision concerning the outline it became clear that the meeting would have to be organized as an online event, considering the restrictions due to the Covid pandemic. 27

  • Page 28

    Over the summer the three Erasmus Initiatives prepared self-assessments. They prepared a common introduction, outlining their background and overall goals, and a shared conclusion. In addition, they prepared more detailed assessment per Erasmus Initiative that were supposed to be read in between the introduction and the conclusion. Thus, each Erasmus Initiative presented an individual narrative but partly by using common elements. The Erasmus Initiatives also selected five individuals to participate in the review committee: • Simin Davoudi, Professor of Environment and Planning, University of Newcastle • Shunsuke Managi, Professor of Technology and Policy, Kyushu University • Richard Cookson, Professor of Health Economics, University of York • Joris Goos, Director Research and Business Intelligence, Municipality of Rotterdam • Jan-Willem Scheijgrond, Vice President Global Government and Public Affairs, Royal Philips (Chair) Nick den Hollander (Academic Affairs) acted as secretary of the committee and we very much appreciate his support. The review took place on November 26-27, 2020. During online sessions the management teams, the core faculty of each Erasmus Initiative, a selection of PhD students and a selection of steering board members met with the review committee. Some meetings were specific for a single Erasmus Initiative, others combined representatives from the three Erasmus Initiatives. All meetings were with the full committee (no parallel sessions). In its subsequent review report, the committee embraced the goals and achievements as described in the self-assessments. The committee concluded that the Erasmus Initiatives had made good progress and represented good value for money. It called the Erasmus Initiatives an example that could and should be followed. The committee appreciated the substantial body of interdisciplinary results they had produced and the significant amount each one of them had obtained in grants. More importantly, the committee concluded that the Erasmus Initiatives provided a stimulating environment for creativity and out-of-the-box thinking. They praised their ability to bring together scholars with a talent for and commitment to interdisciplinary work. Considering their current still somewhat experimental status, the committee expressed that the Erasmus Initiatives would benefit from a long-term vision and a rolling funding cycle, i.e. a commitment to renewal of funding every few years. The committee stressed that this will help to enhance their credibility to stakeholders. They also recommended that the EUR will provide an infrastructure that rewards interdisciplinary work and effort towards societal impact. It also advised to create better institutional support for external communication and encouraged more interaction with stakeholders (e.g. through stakeholder boards per Erasmus Initiative). In addition, the committee provided more detailed recommendations per Erasmus Initiative. For DoIP the main recommendations were to create a clearer definition of what we mean by Inclusive Prosperity, to reach out more to parties in the private sector (e.g. 28

  • Page 29

    in the Port of Rotterdam) and to involve expertise from the Erasmus School of Economics into our projects. The review process, including its preparations, have helped us to critically reflect on our efforts and triggered further internal discussion and planning. We thank the review committee for its constructive debate with us. Its recommendations are useful and inspire us in our development of new activities, partly together with the other Erasmus Initiatives. The joint, coordinated effort of the three Erasmus Initiatives in the context of the review process was encouraging and suggests more coordination in the coming years. 29

  • Page 30

    7. Highlights and prospects The year 2020 will not easily be forgotten. In an unprecedented way it exposed the vulnerability of normal life and business as usual. In doing so, the Covid-crisis has quite dramatically highlighted the relevance of the societal challenges that are addressed by the three Erasmus Initiatives, including Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity. For instance, it has painfully demonstrated the stark difference in vulnerability to infection depending on one’s socio-economic status, the long term implications for employment and earning potential depending on one’s education level and the differences in access to adequate online education and its repercussions for personal development. Moreover, the crisis has demonstrated once again, that every challenge, no matter how medical or technical, is to a large extent a social challenge and deserves to be approached accordingly. Hence, while Covid-19 represents an immediate threat, it also stresses the relevance of the Erasmus Initiatives to a world that is struggling to come to terms with a “new normal”. Against the background of these dramatic developments and despite the complications concerning daily collaboration, Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity managed to not just survive but even reach important objectives in 2020. One of them was the formal incorporation of associates, in order to broaden the expertise involved in our network. The inaugural event for these associates, one of the last before the first lock-down in March, reconfirmed the enthusiasm for and potential behind wider interdisciplinary collaboration at EUR that is a key objective of our initiative. Secondly, we succeeded in broadening our network of external collaborations. We created formal ties with institutions as nearby as TU Delft and as far away as Peking University, but also closed agreements with several organizations outside academia. These collaborations also leveraged our ability to obtain grants, including the large NWO grant on Wise Waste Management, one of the pressing challenges of especially large cities and an important factor concerning inclusion. Despite the year’s complications regarding the organization of events we managed to still create a substantial level of visibility by exploiting less traditional means such as online meetings and social media. Several of our blogs drew a broad readership from across the globe and triggered debate at EUR and beyond. Importantly, in November, the midterm review committee drew very positive conclusions about how we had managed to stimulate interdisciplinary work, the relevance of our results and the general progress that has been realized in the past years. It concluded that our approach could and should be followed and recommended that EUR’s support for us should be extended and expanded. Furthermore, and not unrelated to the outcome of the mid-term review, the Executive Board confirmed that it will provide another round of funding for the Erasmus Initiatives. As a result, an additional amount of almost 4 million euros will be made available to Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity for the years 2021- 2025. Based on this additional funding, we have already started to develop multiannual plans for our activities in those years, based on a critical reflection on what deserves to be continued and what can be improved. In the process we explore new opportunities and changing needs in society and we discuss how we can best develop our capabilities together with our founding schools. Hence, while the challenges we have all 30

  • Page 31

    faced in the past year have been unprecedented and the situation we are in in the Netherlands and the world are still dire in several respects, the future of Dynamics of Inclusive Prosperity continues to look bright. We will continue to work hard to maintain and grow its role as a source of inspiration concerning knowledge about one of society’s most pressing challenges and hope that you will continue to join us in that development. 31

  • Page 32

  • View More

Get the full picture and Receive alerts on lawsuits, news articles, publications and more!