The interplay of formal and informal institutions between local and regional authorities when creating well-functioning public transport systems

References

• Albrechts, L. (2004). Strategic (spatial) planning re-examined. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31, 743–758.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albrechts, L. (2012). Reframing strategic spatial planning by using a coproduction perspective. Planning Theory, 12 (1), 46–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2007). The fluid scales and scope of UK spatial planning. Environment and Planning A, 39 (6), 1478–1496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2009). Soft spaces, fuzzy boundaries, and metagovernance: the new spatial planning in the Thames Gateway. Environment and Planning A, 41, 617–633.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2010). Spatial planning, devolution and new planning spaces. Environment and Planning C, 28 (5), 803–818.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P., Morphet, J., & Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2005). Devolution and the modernization of local governance: prospects for spatial planning. European Planning Studies, 13 (3), 349–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amin, A. (1999). An institutionalist perspective on regional economic development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 23 (2), 365–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aoki, M. (2007). Endogenizing institutions and institutional changes. Journal of Institutional Economics, 3(1), 1–31.
   Google Scholar
• Berman, W., Smith, M., & Bauer, J. (2005). Regional concept for transportation operations. A tool for strengthening and guiding collaboration and coordination. Transportation Research Record, 1925, 245–253.
   Google Scholar
• Counsell, D., & Haughton, G. (2003). Regional planning tensions: planning for economic growth and sustainable development in two contrasting English regions. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21, 225–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2002). Bringing power to planning research. One researcher's praxis story. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21(43), 353–366.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Phronetic planning research. Theoretical and methodological reflections. Planning Theory and Practice, 5 (3), 283–306.
   Google Scholar
• Galland, D. (2012). Is regional planning dead or just coping? The transformation of a state sociospatial project into growth-oriented strategies. Environment and Planning C, 30 (3), 536–552.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George, A.L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• González, S., & Healey, P. (2005). A sociological institutionalist approach to the study of innovation in governance capacity. Urban Studies, 42 (11), 2055–2069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansson, L. (2011). The tactics behind public transport procurements: an integrated actor approach. European Transport Research Review, 3 (4), 197–209.
   Google Scholar
• Hansson, L. (2013). Hybrid steering cultures in the governance of public transport: A successful way to meet demands? Research in Transportation Economics, 39 (1), 175–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haughton, G, Allmendinger P, & Oosterlynck, S. (2013). Spaces of neoliberal experimentation: soft spaces, post politics and neoliberal governmentality. Environment and Planning A, 45 (1), 217–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2009). In search of the “strategic” in spatial strategy making. Planning Theory and Practice, 10 (4), 439–457.
   Google Scholar
• Hedegaard-Sørensen, C., & Longva, F. (2011). Increased coordination in public transport-which mechanisms are available? Transport Policy, 18 (1), 117–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hrelja, R. (2015). Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land use planning. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 74, 1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hrelja, R, Pettersson, F, & Westerdahl, S. (2016). The qualities needed for a successful collaboration: A contribution to the conceptual understanding of collaboration for efficient public transport. Sustainability, 8(6), 542.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubler, P., & Meek, J. W. (2005). Sub-regional transportation initiatives: implications for governance. International Journal of Public Administration, 28, 1081–1094.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, M. (2001). The rise of the regional state in economic governance: ‘partnerships for prosperity’ or new scales of state power? Environment and Planning A, 33 (7), 1185–1211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monios, J., & Lambert, B. (2013). The heartland intermodal corridor: public-private partnerships and the transformation of institutional settings. Journal of Transport Geography, 27 (1), 36–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullen, C., & Marsden, G. (2015). Transport, economic competitiveness and competition: A city perspective. Journal of Transport Geography, 49, 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, P. (2008). Strategic spatial planning: collective action and moments of opportunity. European Planning Studies, 16 (10), 1371–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1), 97–112, American Economic Association Stable.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Sullivan, P.J., & Patel, T. (2004). Fragmentation in transport operations and the case for system integrity. Transport Policy, 11 (3), 215–225.
   Google Scholar
• Priemus, H. (1999). Coordination in planning public transport: Evidence from the Netherlands. Planning Practice and Research, 14 (1), 97–106.
   Google Scholar
• Region Skåne. (1998). Avtal om ansvar för lokal och regional kollektivtrafik i Skåne [Agreement on responsibility for local and regional public transport in Skåne]. Kristianstad: Region Skåne.
   Google Scholar
• Region Skåne. (1999). Skånsk livskraft [A vigorous Skåne]. Kristianstad: Region Skåne.
   Google Scholar
• Region Skåne. (2001). Länsplan för regional transportinfrastruktur i Skåne 2004–2015 [Regional Transport Infrastructure Plan for Skåne 2004–2015]. Kristianstad: Region Skåne.
   Google Scholar
• Region Skåne. (2004). Regionalt utvecklingsprogram för Skåne [Regional development plan for Skåne]. Kristianstad: Region Skåne.
   Google Scholar
• Region Skåne. (2008). Markanvändning i Skåne [Land use in Skåne]. Kristianstad: Region Skåne.
   Google Scholar
• Region Skåne. (2009). Regionalt utvecklingsprogram för Skåne 2009–2016 [Regional development plan for Skåne 2009–2016]. Kristianstad: Region Skåne.
   Google Scholar
• Rivasplata, C., and Hiroyuki, I. (2012). Transit coordination in the U.S. A survey of current practice. Journal of Public Transportation, 15 (1), 2012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rye, T., Monios, J., Hrelja, R., Isaksson, K., & Scholten, C. (forthcoming). The relationship between formal and informal institutions for governance of sustainable public transport. Journal of Transport Geography.
   Google Scholar
• Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism “old” and “new”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41 (2), 270–277.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SFS (The Swedish Code of Statutes). (2010). 1065. Lag om kollektivtrafik. Stockholm: The Riksdag.
   Google Scholar
• Sherriff, G. (2012). Perspectives on getting the region involved in its spatial strategy: or ‘I have no idea what you're talking about. I have not met anyone who knows what an RSS is’. Planning, Practice and Research, 27 (5), 553–570.
   Google Scholar
• Skånetrafiken. (2006). Med buss i Skåne. Strategi för busstrafiken [With bus in Skåne. Bus traffic strategy]. Hässleholm: Skånetrafiken.
   Google Scholar
• Skånetrafiken. (2008). Tågstrategi 2037 [Train strategy 2037]. Hässleholm: Skånetrafiken.
   Google Scholar
• Skånetrafiken. (2010). Skånetrafiken. En idé som växer [Skånetrafiken. An expanding idea]. Hässleholm: Skånetrafiken.
   Google Scholar
• Skånetrafiken. (2011). Trafikförsörjningsplan 2011 [Public transport provision plan 2011]. Hässleholm: Skånetrafiken.
   Google Scholar
• Skånetrafiken. (2012). Trafikförsörjningsplan för Skåne 2012 [Public transport provision plan for Skåne 2012]. Hässleholm: Skånetrafiken.
   Google Scholar
• Skånetrafiken. (2015). Trafikförsörjningsplan för Skåne 2015 [Public transport provision plan for Skåne 2015]. Hässleholm: Skånetrafiken.
   Google Scholar
• Skånetrafiken. (2016). Trafikförsörjningsplan för Skåne 2015 [Public transport provision plan for Skåne 2016]. Hässleholm: Skånetrafiken.
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, C.H., Longva, F. (2011). Increased coordination in public transport. Which mechanisms are available? Transport Policy, 18 (1), 117–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stead, D. (2008). Institutional aspects of integrating transport, environment and health policies. Transport Policy, 15 (3), 139–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stead, D. (2016). Key research themes on governance and sustainable urban mobility. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 10 (1), 40–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thoresson, K., & Isaksson, K. (2013). Kommunala erfarenheter av samordnad kollektivtrafik- och bebyggelseplanering [Municipal experiences of integrated public transport and land use planning]. Stockholm: Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions.
   Google Scholar
• Timms, P. (2011). Urban transport policy transfer: “bottom-up” and “top-down” perspectives. Transport Policy, 18, 513–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trafikanalys. (2016). Lokal och regional kollektivtrafik 2015 [Local and regional public transport 2015]. Statistik 2016:26, Stockholm: Trafikanalys [Transport Analysis].
   Google Scholar
• Treib, O., Bähr, H., & Falkner, G. (2007). Modes of governance: towards a conceptual clarification. Journal of European Public Policy, 14 (1), 1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Velde, D. (1999). Organisational forms and entrepreneurship in public transport. Part 1: Classifying organisational forms. Transport Policy, 6 (3), 147–157.
   Google Scholar
• van de Velde, D. (2014). Market initiative regimes in public transport in Europe: Recent developments. Research in Transportation Economics, 48 (12), 33–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Velde, D, & Wallis, I. (2013). ‘Regulated deregulation’ of local bus services—An appraisal of international developments. Research in Transportation Economics, 39 (1), 21–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Straalen, F. M., Janssen-Jansen, L. B., & van den Brink, A. (2014). Delivering planning objectives through regional-based land-use planning and land policy instruments: an assessment of recent experiences in the Dutch provinces. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32, 567–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. (2009). Case study research, design and methods. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar