Nieuws

She is not scared that the institute will have to start functioning differently as a result of new policy. Nonetheless, she is critical of the effects of this policy. In the week before Prinsjesdag (“Budget Day”), we spoke with Clémence Ross, director of the Dutch Institute for Sport and Physical Activity (whose Dutch abbreviation is NISB), about the degree of fragmentation that threatens to emerge in the NISB’s knowledge network. We also spoke about how that knowledge is spread.

Clémence Ross, director of NISB

For twelve years, the NISB has been collecting and disseminating knowledge about methods that lead to a healthier lifestyle for all ages, but especially among young people. Prevention of health problems by doing sports and exercise is an essential part of that process.

And this goes beyond what you might initially suspect. Part of a healthy lifestyle also involves the local infrastructure and facilities, healthy food, a coordinated policy in terms of local politics, or finding a way to connect with existing initiatives in the area.

The former State Secretary for Health, Welfare and Sport (VWS) feels just like a fish in water in her current position. “There are some very nice, good and motivated people working here.”

A Knowledge Institute in the service of practice

According to Ross, the purpose of the NISB is to help scientific knowledge connect to practice, and to soundly anchor this process in policy, so that it does not depend on individuals or a on certain minister or an arbitrary arrangement.

That is also the goal of Fysio Educatief: the integrated, and project-based, introduction of an exercise methodology in all primary schools. And Ross is enthusiastic about it, specifically because the materials in The Class Moves! 3.0 involve not only children but also their parents. “Parents and the family are, after all, the most influential examples for young people.”

Both NISB and Fysio Educatief embrace the idea that in this field, you need to have one foot grounded in practice and the other one grounded in science.”Efficient and effective” are words that Ross repeatedly mentions in our conversation.

Sport and exercise

In any case, in the Beleidsbrief Sport (“Policy Statement on Sports”) Minister Edith Schippers (of Health, Welfare and Sport) underlines the importance of sport and exercise. In summary, the key points are:

• Encouraging exercise in the neighbourhood
• Accessible and reliable information made to measure
• Empowering young people
• Making the healthy choice easy by means of a positive approach
• Actively connecting to the efforts made by other parties (public-private partnerships)

These points seem to confirm the importance of the NISB’s work. Despite all the cutbacks that have been announced, are things looking up for the NISB?

Ross: “Let me put it this way. Yes, when it comes to the content of our work. For that, this policy is obviously relevant. But when it comes to the role that the government takes on for itself in the process, that is minimal. The government has always found it important that there is a knowledge institute that makes information available to the field “for free” (i.e. without any reciprocation), and that government has been pulling back considerably. So knowledge is continuing to be gained, but the assignments to then share that knowledge are not necessarily awarded to the NISB. Suddenly we are no longer the logical partner for that, but instead these assignments will be awarded by means of contracts and tenders.”

Working via tenders

This has major implications for the NISB, Ross said, because the institute was often involved in supervising incentives measures, for example with the “Exercise Cure” programme for people with diabetes.

Ross: “With that programme, over the past few years we have built up a vast network of contacts in municipalities, in primary care, in education, and in welfare work, with whom we have jointly examined how we can spread best practices as well as possible. But we can no longer take that for granted.”

“We can no longer acquire the knowledge about such a broad implementation of interventions, and other players on the market will therefore no longer share their knowledge with us. This means that it will be difficult for us to maintain that knowledge network.”

Public-private partnerships

The NISB was originally founded to gather knowledge about lifestyle, sports and exercise, but now, because of the competition, that knowledge will become fragmented. Is that a negative result of public-private partnerships?

“You can see it that way, and there are also opportunities. But the maintenance and dissemination of this kind of dynamic knowledge, the kind that you get from training courses and workshops: that is becoming much more difficult. It’s different than a course in a foreign language or math. During the training courses, we also learn a lot in exchange, which then enriches our own knowledge. We shouldn’t allow that aspect to be cut off.”

“We have yet to see whether other parties will be willing to share their knowledge, and whether our core funding will be sufficient for us to continue gaining enough knowledge to remain a good knowledge institute. Cooperation with private parties is something that we already have now, but at the moment the knowledge we have is still available to all of the Netherlands.”

Do you already have an idea about what the possible fragmentation might look like? Will the market parties also share their knowledge with you?

“No, they probably will not. I’m already noticing that they’re starting to pluck away our employees. If you get employees like that on board, than it’s easier to take part, because then you already have that knowledge in-house. We, on the other hand, are stuck with certain tariffs and collective employment agreements, and we cannot compete with the market in terms of salaries. And that’s difficult.”

“So we will remain dependent on the central government. And not just on the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport, but in a very broad sense. Our work also connects us to other ministries such as Education, Social Affairs and Agriculture – for example on matters relating to green in the city. These ministries also make use of our knowledge.”

The possibility of the NISB itself becoming a market party is not one that the NISB is considering. And Ross does indeed sees opportunities for other types of cooperation, under the right conditions.

Another possible role for NISB Consult

“We are looking possibly separating our customized arm, NISB Consult, from the institute. Then the NISB would be purely a knowledge institute that works only through grants. And the customized work – for example disseminating knowledge with communities, with business partners, and with professionals – we would do with Consult.”

“NISB Consult already works often with other small parties that need to pay their own way. In that case we’re talking about businesses that assist sports associations, or that are working on innovations, on clever initiatives in the neighbourhood. In Eindhoven, for example, there is just such a laboratory, where new technology is tested out. How can you use IT and new media to get young people to exercise more?”

“There are various companies that are working on complementary projects. Not by means of subsidies, but instead they are working on things that there is a need for, or where purchasing power is available. We need to look at how we can join hands, without actually merging our organisations, and wind up with a kind of co-creation. In that case, a company that has a question for which no subsidy is available would be able to contact us, and we might be able to help them, for example with training courses and the like.”

Collaborating with entrepreneurs

Ross: “If you have a group of entrepreneurs who say that they want to maintain the quality standards of the knowledge institute, then you can cooperate well. And the requirements of the NISB, namely that projects be effective and efficient, are very important in the market.

“The fear that I now have, about parties keeping knowledge to themselves, could be overcome by making agreements with our business arm. For example, by feeding the knowledge that you gain from local implementation back to the knowledge institute.”

“That’s a direction that we are currently thinking about. Of course we’re not that far along yet, but what is not here today may well be here tomorrow. You should always keep moving forward and keep actively thinking along with the changes, but you have to keep an eye on your own goals, and safeguard your quality. The quality shouldn’t suffer as a result of these changes.”

Would you like to comment on this interview? You can do so below. We welcome your comments!