With the increasing need for entangling the complexity around worldwide crises and transitions, the transdisciplinary collaboration between governmental organisations, multidisciplinary academic institutions and companies is becoming increasingly crucial. Involving citizens within the policy-making processes regarding those crises and transitions already led to various positive outcomes, for example increased awareness, understanding of policies, new innovations, and acceptance of decision-making. This participatory involvement is now effectively executed through the implementation of Participatory Value Evaluations (PVEs). Since HEIs need to fulfill a Third Mission, involving employees within their policy making might lead to several benefits as well. This master thesis explores the added value of applying a PVE within the higher education institution (HEI) context, analysing both the perspectives of employees and the policymakers, and therefore provide valuable insights for future implementations of PVEs within professional bureaucracies. The results show a pivotal role for using the PVE approach within HEIs, compared to the citizen-to-government context. However, further research is needed to establish design principles and preconditions around the PVE approach within a HEI.

This research explores the different envisioned roles of gas infrastructure for integrating offshore wind into the energy system of the North Sea Region (NSR). In this research, the NSR is defined as consisting of the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Norway, Denmark and the United Kingdom. The NSR is characterized by the increasing use of their considerable offshore wind potential, its current decommissioning developments of coal and nuclear energy, and its history in supplying, transporting and consuming natural gas.
Within the NSR, there are different visions on how to integrate and leverage the full potential of
offshore wind. This research focuses on how these coexisting visions can be made more compatible; by being able to exist or occur together without problems or conflict. Of particular interest to us due to its large economic benefit is the repurposing of gas infrastructure.
Electricity and gas infrastructure are interrelated by electrolysers producing hydrogen gas using
electricity and gas-­fueled power plants producing electricity. Focusing on the integration of offshore
wind in the energy system and the envisioned role of gas infrastructure, this research initially identified several important themes in different energy visions, such as the locations envisioned for placing
electrolysers. In short, these themes entail both technologies, infrastructure choices, socio­economic
drivers, policies and regulations.
Subsequently, this research concluded that some themes are envisioned differently by various actors. These differences lead to multiple types of (in)compatibility of the different envisioned future
energy systems in the NSR. In order to answer our main research question, the current state of compatibility in the NSR is characterized. This is done by subdividing the different identified themes into
four different groups with varying (in)compatibility levels termed ‘Group A. Celebrated themes’, ‘Group
B. Themes where actors envision the same approach’, ‘Group C. Themes with competition between
different types of approaches’ and ‘Group D. Themes where there is no co­existence possible’.
This research concludes that there are differing visions of themes in the NSR, that for a large part
are based on fixed underlying societal and geographical themes. It is therefore impossible for actors to collaboratively pursue one uniform compatible energy integration vision, with the exact same
details envisioned by every actor in the NSR. Therefore, this research recommends collaborative futuring, defined as maintaining one’s vision whilst considering other existing visions within the relating
geographical and dimensional (gas, electricity, hydrogen, offshore wind, etc.) scope. Considering
the four previously mentioned groups, when one is ‘collaborative futuring’, one accepts that not every
theme can develop into a group ‘A. Celebrated themes’, but that one must prevent themes developing into or being a group 'D. No co-existence' theme. In order to gain insight into how different
themes can be collaborated upon, this research has designed a ‘collaboration framework’ to structure
the (in)compatibility levels of different themes.