In-between stability and adaptability

References

• Ansell, C.; Gash, A. (2018): Collaborative Platforms as a Governance Strategy. Journal of public administration research and theory, 28 (1), pp. 16–32. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mux030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansell, C.; Torfing, J. (2016): Introduction: theories of governance. In: Handbook on theories of governance. Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Agger, A.; Hedensted Lund, D. (2017): Collaborative Innovation in the Public Sector – New Perspectives on the Role of Citizens? Scandinavian journal of public administration. 21 (3), pp. 17–37. doi: 10.58235/sjpa.v21i3.11557
   Google Scholar
• Agger, A.; Sørensen, E. (2018): Managing collaborative innovation in public bureaucracies. Planning Theory, 17 (1), pp. 53–73. doi: 10.1177/1473095216672500
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahrne, G.; Brunsson, N. (2019): Organization outside Organizations. The Abundance of Partial Organization in Social Life. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alvesson, M.; Sköldberg, K. (2009): Reflexive methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research. SAGE publications.
   Google Scholar
• Berglund-Snodgrass, L.; Mukhtar-Landgren, D. (2020): Conceptualizing testbed planning: Urban planning in the intersection of experimental and public sector logics. Urban planning, 5, pp. 96–106. doi: 10.17645/up.v5i1.2528
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berglund-Snodgrass, L. (2022): Risk and approaches to risk-taking in testbed planning. Planning practice and research, 37 (1), pp. 79–94. doi: 10.1080/02697459.2021.1992942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blix-Germundsson, L.; Augustinsson, S.; Lidén, A. (2020): Collaboration in the making – Towards a practice based approach to university innovation intermediary organisations. Sustainability, 12, 5142, pp. 1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christianson, M. K.; Farkas, M. T.; Sutcliffe, K. M.; Weick, K. E. (2009): Learning through rare events: Significant interruptions at the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum. Organization Science, 20 (5), pp. 846–860. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1080.0389
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czarniawska, B. (1985): The ugly sister: On relationships between the private and the public sectors in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Management Studies, 2 (2), pp. 83–103. doi: 10.1016/0281-7527(85)90001-5
   Google Scholar
• Czarniawska, B. (2005): Karl Weick: Concepts, style and reflection. The Sociological Review, 53, pp. 267–278. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00554.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• den Hond, F.; Järvi, K.; Välikangas, L. (2019): Partial de-organization for innovation and strategic renewal? A study of an industrial innovation programme. In Ahrne, G.; Brunsson, N. (eds.), Organization outside Organizations: The abundance of Partial Organization in Social Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 359–389.
   Google Scholar
• DeVault, M.; McCoy, L. (2002): Institutional Ethnography: Using Interviews to Investigate Ruling Relations. In Gubrium, J.; Holstein, J. (eds.), Handbook of Interview Research: Context & Method, Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp. 751–776.
   Google Scholar
• Ek-Österberg, E.; Qvist, M. (2020): Public Sector Innovation as Governance Reform: A Comparative Analysis of Competitive and Collaborative Strategies in the Swedish Transport Sector. Administration and Society. 52 (2), pp. 292–318. doi: 10.1177/0095399718789077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsbach, K. D.; Barr, P. S.; Hargadon, A. B. (2005): Identifying Situated Cognition in Organizations. Organization Science, 16 (4), pp. 422–433. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eneqvist, E.; Algehed, J.; Jensen, C.; Karvonen, A. (2022): Legitimacy in municipal experimental governance: questioning the public good in urban innovation practices, European Planning Studies, 30 (8), pp. 1596–1614. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2021.2015749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson, E.; Andersson, T.; Hellström, A.; Gadolin, C.; Lifvergren, S. (2020): Collaborative Public Management: Coordinated Value Propositions among Public Service Organisations. Public Management Review 22 (6), pp. 791–812. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2019.1604793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fred, M. (2018): Projectification: The Trojan horse of local government (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Fred, M. (2019): Local Government Projectification in Practice – a Multiple Institutional Logic Perspective. Local Government Studies 46 (3), pp. 351–370. doi: 10.1080/03003930.2019.1606799
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fred, M.; Godenhjelm, S. (eds.) (2023): Projectification. Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Implications. Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Fred, M.; Mukhtar-Landgren, D.; Berglund-Snodgrass, L.; Paulsson, A. (2022): Why getting people in the same room isn’t enough. In Oldbury, K.; Isaksson, K.; Marsden, G. (eds.), Experimentation for sustainable transport? Risks, strengths, and governance implications. Linnefors förlag, Sweden, pp. 59–72.
   Google Scholar
• Fred, M.; Dalia Mukhtar-Landgren, D. (2022): Productive resistance in public sector innovation – introducing social impact bonds in Swedish local government, Public Management Review, DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2022.2123027.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fredricsson, C.; Smas, L. (2015): Tensions in Nordic urban planning, Nordregio News, 2015 (2). Available at: http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1187155&dswid=-3966.
   Google Scholar
• Gustafsson, S. (2016): Medborgarskapande på olika villkor: självbilder, skolkoder och syn på kunskap i den svenska gymnasieskolan. Lund: Statsveten- skapliga institutionen.
   Google Scholar
• Hakkarainen, L.; Hyysalo, S. (2016): The evolution of intermediary activities: Broadening the concept of facilitation in living labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6 (1), pp. 45–58. doi: 10.22215/timreview/960
   Google Scholar
• Haveri, A.; Anttiroiko, A.-V. (2021): Urban platforms as a mode of governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 0 (0); https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211005855.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2004): Creativity and Urban Governance, disP – The Planning Review, 158, pp. 11–20; DOI: 10.1080/02513625.2004.10556888.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2005): Collaborative planning. Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. 2nd edition. Red Globe Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hedberg, B. L.; Nystrom, P. C.; Starbuck, W. H. (1976): Camping on Seesaws: Prescriptions for a Self-Designing Organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), pp. 41–65. doi: 10.2307/2391877
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernes, T. (2014): A Process Theory of Organization. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hernes, T. (2022): Organization & Time. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, R. C.; Levenhagen, M. (1995): Metaphors and mental models: Sensemaking and sensegiving in innovative and entrepreneurial activities. Journal of Management, 21(6), pp. 1057–1074. doi: 10.1177/014920639502100603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodgson, D.; Cicmil, S. (eds.) (2006): Making Projects Critical. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, J. (2006): Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35, pp. 715–728. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen, M.; van der Voort, H. (2016): Adaptive governance: Towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Government information quarterly, 33 (1), pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2016.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kivimaa, P.; Boon, W.; Hyysalo, S.; Klerkx, L. (2019): Towards a typology of intermediaries in sustainability transitions: A systematic review and a research agenda, Research Policy, 48 (4), pp. 1062–1075. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronsell, A.; Mukhtar-Landgren, D. (2019): Experimental governance: the role of municipalities in urban living labs. European planning studies, 26 (5), pp. 988–1007. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2018.1435631
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loughlin, J. (2000): Introduction: The transformation of the democratic state in Western Europe. In Loughlin, J. (ed.), Subnational Democracy in the European Union: Challenges and Opportunities. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–33.
   Google Scholar
• Åkerström, M.; Jacobsson, K.; Andersson, C. E. Wästerfors, D. (2021): Hidden attractions of administration: the peculiar appeal of meetings and documents. Abingdon: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781003108436
   Google Scholar
• Maitlis, S.; Christianson, M. (2014): Sensemaking in Organizations: Taking Stick and Moving Forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 8 (1), pp. 57–125. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2014.873177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maitlis, S. (2005): The social processes of organizational sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 48, pp. 21–49. doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.15993111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mukhtar-Landgren, D. (2021): Local Autonomy in Temporary Organizations: The Case of Smart City Pilots. Administration and Society, 53 (10), pp. 1485-1511. doi: 10.1177/00953997211009884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P. (ed.) (2014): Handbook of Innovation in Public Services. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Patrucco, P. P. (2014): The Evolution of Knowledge Organization and the Emergence of a Platform for Innovation in the Car Industry. Industry and innovation, 21 (3), pp. 243–266. doi: 10.1080/13662716.2014.910892
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parjanen, S.; Hyypiä, M. (2018): Innovation platforms as a solution to the proximity paradox. European planning studies, 26 (7), pp. 1312–1329. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2018.1476469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parjanen, S.; Rantala, T. (2021): Building an open innovation platform as a part of city renewal initiatives. European planning studies, 29 (12), pp. 2165–2183. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2021.1903397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauws, W. (2017): Embracing Uncertainty Without Abandoning Planning, disP – The Planning Review, 53 (1), pp. 32–45. doi: 10.1080/02513625.2017.1316539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauws, W.; De Roo, G. (2016): Adaptive planning: Generating conditions for urban adaptability. Lessons from Dutch organic development strategies. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43 (6), 1052–1074. doi: 10.1177/0265813516658886
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H.; Webber, M. (1973): Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4 (2), pp. 155–169. doi: 10.1007/BF01405730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandberg, J.; Tsoukas, H. (2014): Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36 (1), pp. 6–32.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarzman, H. B. (1989): The meeting. Springer-Verlag New York Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Styhre, A. (2007): The Innovative Bureaucracy. Bureaucracy in an Age of Fluidity. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sveiby, K. E.; Gripenberg, P.; Segercrantz, B. (2012): Challenging the Innovation Paradigm. Routledge. New York & London.
   Google Scholar
• Vallance, P.; Tewdwr-Jones, M.; Kempton, L. (2020): Building collaborative platforms for urban innovation: Newcastle City Futures as a quadruple helix intermediary. European Urban and Regional Studies, 27 (4), pp. 325–341. doi: 10.1177/0969776420905630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wei Choo, C. (2005): The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge and make decisions. Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195176780.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1995): Sensemaking in organizations. SAGE Publications. Thousands Oaks, London and New Delhi.
   Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E.; Sutcliffe, K. M.; Obstfeld, D. (2005): Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking. Organization Science, 16 (4), pp. 409–421. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vigar, G.; Cowie, P.; Healey, P. (2020): Innovation in planning: creating and securing public value, European Planning Studies, 28 (3), pp. 521–540. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2019.1639400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. (2014): Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar