Gatekeepers of local environmental progress? Self-referencing practices of urban bureaucracy

References

• Adelman, S. 2018. ”The Sustainable Development Goals, Anthropocentrism and Neoliberalism.” In Sustainable Development Goals, edited by D. French & L. Kotzé, 15–40. Edward Elgar Publishing. doi:10.4337/9781786438768.00008.
   Google Scholar
• Åkerström, M., K. Jacobsson, and E. Andersson Cederholm. 2021. Hidden Attractions of Administration: The Peculiar Appeal of Meetings and Documents. First ed. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Arts, B., and P. Leroy, ed. 2006. Institutional Dynamics in Environmental Governance. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bartunek, J.M., and M.K. Moch. 1987. “First-Order, Second-Order, and Third-Order Change and Organization Development Interventions: A Cognitive Approach.” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 23 (4): 483–500. doi:10.1177/002188638702300404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M. 1984. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” The Sociological Review 32 (1_suppl): 196–233. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.1984.tb00113.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, J.M., C. Wyborn, M. E. Ryan, R.S. Reid, M. Riechers, A. Serban, N.J. Bennett, C. Cvitanovic, M.E. Fernández-Giménez, K.A. Galvin, B.E. Goldstein. 2021. “Six Modes of Co-Production for Sustainability.” Nature Sustainability 4 (11): 983–996. doi:10.1038/s41893-021-00755-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• da Cruz, N.F., P. Rode, and M. McQuarrie. 2019. “New Urban Governance: A Review of Current Themes and Future Priorities.” Journal of Urban Affairs 41 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1080/07352166.2018.1499416.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson, K.M., J. Kellett, L. Wilson, and S. Pullen. 2012. “Assessing Urban Sustainability from a Social Democratic Perspective: A Thematic Approach.” Local Environment 17 (1): 57–73. doi:10.1080/13549839.2011.631990.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Vries, H., V.J.J.M. Bekkers, and L.G. Tummers. 2015. “Innovation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda.” SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2638618.
   Google Scholar
• DeHart-Davis, L. 2007. ”The Unbureaucratic Personality.” Public Administration Review 67 (5): 892–903. JSTOR. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00776.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demir, T. 2016. “Politics and Administration.” In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, edited by A. Farazmand, 1–6. Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_1408-1.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. 1986. How Institutions Think. 1st ed. New York: Syracuse University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dunsire, A. 1996. “Tipping the Balance: Autopoiesis and Governance.” Administration & Society 28 (3): 299–334. doi:10.1177/009539979602800302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, F. 2000. Citizens, Experts, and the Environment: The Politics of Local Knowledge. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (2): 219–245. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1077800405284363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guston, D.H. 2001. “Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduction.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 26 (4): 399–408. doi:10.1177/016224390102600401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hales, C. 2002. ““Bureaucracy-Lite” and Continuities in Managerial Work.” British Journal of Management 13 (1): 51–66. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansjürgens, B., and D. Heinrichs. 2014. “Megacities and Climate Change: Early Adapters, Mainstream Adapters and Capacities.” In Megacities, edited by F. Kraas, S. Aggarwal, M. Coy, & G. Mertins, 9–24. Springer Netherlands. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-3417-5_2.
   Google Scholar
• Hochschild, A. R. 2012. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hysing, E., and J. Olsson. 2018. Green Inside Activism for Sustainable Development. Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-56723-5.
   Google Scholar
• Ingold, K., and F. Varone. 2012. “Treating Policy Brokers Seriously: Evidence from the Climate Policy.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22 (2): 319–346. doi:10.1093/jopart/mur035.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irwin, A., and M. Michael. 2003. Science, Social Theory and Public Knowledge. Maidenhead/Philadelphia: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., ed. 2010. States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order (Transferred to Digital Print). London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, P., G. Wood, C. Brewster, and M. Brookes. 2009. “The Rise of Post-Bureaucracy: Theorists’ Fancy or Organizational Praxis?” International Sociology 24 (1): 37–61. doi:10.1177/0268580908100246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence, T.B., R. Suddaby, and B. Leca, eds. 2009. Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levitas, A. 2018. “Local Government Reform as State Building: What the Polish Case Says About “Decentralisation.” Zarządzanie Publiczne 3 (45)/2018): 5–25. doi:10.15678/ZP.2018.45.3.01
   Google Scholar
• Lipsky, M. 2010. Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. 30th anniversary expanded ed. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Lowndes, V., and M. Roberts. 2013. Why Institutions Matter the New Institutionalism in Political Science. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• March, J.G., and J.P. Olsen. 2008. “The Logic of Appropriateness.“ The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, online edn, Oxford Academic, 2 Sept. 2009, edited by R., Goodin, M., Moran, and M., Rein, 689–708. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199548453.003.0034
   Google Scholar
• Niedziałkowski, K., and R. Beunen. 2019. “The Risky Business of Planning Reform – the Evolution of Local Spatial Planning in Poland.” Land Use Policy 85: 11–20. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. 2011. OECD Urban Policy Reviews, Poland 2011, OECD Urban Policy Reviews. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264097834-en.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2021. Better Governance, Planning and Services in Local Self-Governments in Poland. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/550c3ff5-en.
   Google Scholar
• Patterson, J.J., and D. Huitema. 2019. “Institutional Innovation in Urban Governance: The Case of Climate Change Adaptation.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 62 (3): 374–398. doi:10.1080/09640568.2018.1510767.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearsall, H., and I. Anguelovski. 2016. “Contesting and Resisting Environmental Gentrification: Responses to New Paradoxes and Challenges for Urban Environmental Justice.” Sociological Research Online 21 (3): 121–127. doi:10.5153/sro.3979.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petridou, E., P. Becker, and J. Sparf. 2021. “Policy Entrepreneurs in Public Administration: A Social Network Analysis.” Politics & Policy 49 (2): 414–445. doi:10.1111/polp.12400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portillo, S. 2012. “The Paradox of Rules: Rules as Resources and Constraints.” Administration & Society 44 (1): 87–108. doi:10.1177/0095399711413714.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulsen, B. 2009. ”Public Administration in Teams: Self-Governing Civil Servants.” In The Politics of Self-Governance, edited by E. Sørensen & P. Triantafillou, 1st ed., 151–168. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315554259-9.
   Google Scholar
• Putkowska-Smoter, R., and J. Frankowski. 2020. “Right to the Map? Counter-Mapping Practices of Smog Alerts and Urban Greenery Movements in Poland.” Society Register 4 (4): 129–150. doi:10.14746/sr.2020.4.4.06.
   Google Scholar
• Putkowska-Smoter, R., and K. Niedziałkowski. 2020. “Street Level Bureaucracy in Response to Environmental Pressure. Insights from Forestry and Urban Green Space Governance in Poland.” Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 39 5 900–918. doi:10.1177/2399654420972114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rayner, S. 2012. “Uncomfortable Knowledge: The Social Construction of Ignorance in Science and Environmental Policy Discourses.” Economy and Society 41 (1): 107–125. doi:10.1080/03085147.2011.637335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regulski, J. 2003. Local Government Reform in Poland: An Insider’s Story. Budapest: Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative.
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H.W.J., and M.M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Berkeley, Calif: Institute of Urban & Regional Development, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Sadura, P. 2012. “Za Obywatelskie Zaangażowanie Trzeba Płacić.” In Partycypacja: Przewodnik Krytyki Politycznej, edited by J. Erbel, & P. Sadura, 40–51. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Krytyki Politycznej.
   Google Scholar
• Safford, H.D., S.C. Sawyer, S.D. Kocher, J.K. Hiers, and M. Cross. 2017. “Linking Knowledge to Action: The Role of Boundary Spanners in Translating Ecology.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 15 (10): 560–568. doi:10.1002/fee.1731.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneiberg, M., and M. Lounsbury. 2017. ”Social Movements and the Dynamics of Institutions and Organizations.” In The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, edited by R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. Lawrence, & R. Meyer, 281–310. SAGE Publications Ltd. doi:10.4135/9781446280669.n12.
   Google Scholar
• Schreyögg, G., and J. Sydow. 2010. “Crossroads—organizing for Fluidity? Dilemmas of New Organizational Forms.” Organization Science 21 (6): 1251–1262. doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0561.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, W.R. 1995. Institutions and Organizations. Los Angeles/London/New Delhi/Singapore: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Sevä, M. 2015. The Decisive Role of Street-Level Bureaucrats in Environmental Management. Luleå University of Technology. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:990441/FULLTEXT01.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, W., and K.A. Thelen, ed. 2005. Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Styhre, A. 2012. The Innovative Bureaucracy Bureaucracy in an Age of Fluidity. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Swianiewicz, P. 2002. “Modele samorządu Terytorialnego W Krajach Europy Zachodniej Oraz Środkowowschodniej—Próba Generalizacji.” Studia Regionalne I Lokalne 2002: 49–67.
   Google Scholar
• Sztandar-Sztanderska, K., and M. Zielenska. 2020. “What Makes an Ideal Unemployed Person? Values and Norms Encapsulated in a Computerized Profiling Tool.“ Social Work & Society 18(1) : 1–16- . https://d-nb.info/1210456990/34
   Google Scholar
• Szulecka, J., and K. Szulecki. 2017. “Polish Environmental Movement 1980-2017: (De)Legitimization, Politics & Ecological Crises.” SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3075126.
   Google Scholar
• Thelen, K.A. 2004. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Trusty, T., and L.K. Cerveny. 2012. “The Role of Discretion in Recreation Decision-Making by Resource Professionals in the USDA Forest Service.” Journal of Environmental Management 107: 114–123. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.04.021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UN-Habitat. 2011. Cities and Climate Change : Global Report on Human Settlements 2011. London, Washington DC: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar