State-led redress programmes are commonly established by governments to respond to large-scale institutional failures and repair damaged relationships with citizens. However, such programmes frequently struggle to meet the needs and expectations of those they aim to compensate. While these shortcomings are often framed as implementation failures, this thesis argues that difficulties may originate earlier in the policy process, namely in how the concept of “redress” is initially understood and translated into policy design.

This research therefore examines how different actors conceptualise state-led redress during the early phase of a redress process and how these conceptions shape subsequent design choices. The redress operation following the Dutch childcare benefits scandal serves as an in-depth case study. The study adopts a qualitative and interpretative research approach grounded in systems thinking, combining desk research with semi-structured interviews with actors operating at different institutional levels. Two analytical lenses structure the analysis: perceived procedural justice, focusing on citizens’ experiences of fairness, and networked governance, highlighting the institutional complexity of multi-actor governance contexts.

The findings show that redress is not conceptualised as a single, stable policy problem. Instead, actors emphasise different objects of restoration, leading to three main conceptions of redress: financial repair, emotional recognition, and institutional legitimacy. These conceptions are closely related to actors’ institutional positions and influence design choices such as standardisation, flexibility, and accountability mechanisms. Because these perspectives coexist, tensions between financial compensation, relational recognition, and institutional legitimacy become embedded in the design of redress processes.

The thesis develops a reflective framework to support dialogue about these tensions during the design of future redress programmes. By making underlying assumptions and trade-offs explicit, the framework aims to support the development of redress processes that are both experienced as fair by affected citizens and workable within complex governance systems.

The Mekong Delta in Vietnam, one of the world’s most fertile and ecologically rich deltas, faces environmental challenges that threaten its biodiversity and local communities. Historically, the delta’s extensive mangrove forests provided natural coastal protection, but in recent decades, agricultural expansion, aquaculture, and infrastructure developments have degraded these ecosystems.
This research focuses on Bac Liêu, a region acutely affected by these changes. With diminishing mangrove buffers, local vulnerabilities to environmental hazards have increased, putting pressure on sea defenses. In response, the Dutch government and Vietnamese partners have introduced the “Mekong Living Lab,” an initiative for in-field research that promotes mangrove restoration and sustainable coastal management.
Conducted by TU Delft students, this study contributes to the Living Lab’s goals by exploring the causes of mangrove decline in Bac Liêu. Combining interviews with local residents and field data on coastal profiles, this multidisciplinary approach seeks to safeguard the ecological and economic future of the Mekong Delta.
The study suggests an integrated approach within the Living Lab framework, emphasizing research, showcasing, and education to bridge hydraulic, ecological, and socio-economic perspectives. Priority recommendations include continuous cross-sectional measurements, sediment retention analysis, stakeholder engagement strategies, and further interdisciplinary studies on mangrove viability. These initiatives aim to align technical insights with stakeholder needs, advancing observation-driven solutions for Bac Liêu’s mangrove ecosystems.