We analyze two citizen collectives of ‘professional city makers’ who have shaped participation in circular area development in anticipation of the Dutch Environment and Planning Act. The activities of professional city-makers form an interesting new phenomenon that requires attention as well as the implications: it is precisely through the professionalism of the city-makers’ efforts that there is a regular tension in the participation process between their role as citizen and professional in their contact with the government. We therefore discuss how the participation of professional city-makers in area development exposes different paradoxes that must be taken into account in the further implementation of the Environment and Planning Act. In short, we argue that participation in the Act is presented in a traditional way and does not fit the new role of citizens in area development in the 21st century.

The Environment and Planning Act (EPA), which will enter into force in 2021, has been called the most influential legislative reform in the Netherlands since World War II. This article forms the introduction to a special issue devoted to the EPA, in which scholars from various disciplines reflect on the societal and legal ramifications of this new act. The authors introduce the different articles but also offer their perspective on the emergence of this new field of research. Socio-legal research into such a vast new regulatory field benefits from the application of multiple perspectives and different research methods. Conspicuously, the authors of the various articles differ on how to assess the new regulation of Dutch spatial planning. Some are pessimistic, others strike a more optimistic note. In this introduction two more perspectives on the law are offered. The perspective of prefigurative law (Davina Cooper) embodies the more optimistic view, whilst the perspective of outsourced law (Pauline Westerman) sides with the pessimists.

The concept of family group conferences (FGCs) originated in New Zealand in 1989 as a tool and statutory right for extended family networks to arrange for the welfare and safety of a child that is neglected or abused by his/her own parents. Through successful FGCs, state intervention can be avoided while the resourcefulness of the larger community is mobilized. The concept has proliferated to many countries and therefore lends itself for analysis as a ‘legal transplant’. This contribution investigates the FGC as a transplant, focussing on how the concept has been adapted and incorporated in the legal systems of England and the Netherlands. In these two countries the ‘Big Society’ and austerity measures in the social domain are high on the policy agenda. How are such policy priorities blended – if at all – with the emancipatory ideal of granting family networks autonomy next to, or even over, publicly funded professionals? It appears that the FGC concept has been compromised in both England and the Netherlands, but in different ways.