From exemplary practitioners to urban chameleons? The role of the citizen in the redistribution of tasks in local governance

References

• Becher, D. 2010. “The Participant’s Dilemma: Bringing Conflict and Representation Back In.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34 (3): 496–511. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00965.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Graaf, L., M. van Hulst, and A. Michels. 2015. “Enhancing Participation in Disadvantaged Urban Neighborhoods.” Local Government Studies 41 (1): 44–62. doi:10.1080/03003930.2014.908771.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Wilde, M., M. Hurenkamp, and E. Tonkens. 2014. “Flexible Relations, Frail Contacts and Failing Demands: How Community Groups and Local Institutions Interact in Local Governance in the Netherlands.” Urban Studies 51 (16): 3365–3382. doi:10.1177/0042098013484531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durose, C., M. Van Hulst, S. Jeffars, O. Escobar, A. Agger, and L. De Graaf. 2015. “Five Ways to Make a Difference: Perceptions of Practitioners Working in Urban Neighborhoods.” Public Administration Review 76 (4): 576–586. doi:10.1111/puar.12502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fung, A., and E. O. Wright. 2003. Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. Vol. 4 Of The Real Utopias Project, 1995. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Ghorashi, H. 2014. “Routed Connections in Late Modern Times.” Chap. 3 In Revisiting Iris Marion Young on Normalisation, Inclusion and Democracy, edited by U. M. Vieten, 49–66. London: Palgrave Pivot.
   Google Scholar
• Keast, R., M. P. Mandell, K. Brown, and G. Woolcock. 2004. “Network Structures: Working Differently and Changing Expectations.” Public Administration Review 64 (3): 363–371. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00380.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovács, Z., P. Smets, and H. Ghorashi. 2019. “The Game of Participation in Amsterdam East. An Alternative to the Neoliberal or a Neoliberal Alternative?” Chap. 7 In Enabling Urban Alternatives. Crises, Contestation and Cooperation, edited by J. K. Fisker, L. Chiappini, L. Pugalis, and A. Bruzzese.Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, S. 2005. “Studying Actions in Context: A Qualitative Shadowing Method for Organizational Research.” Qualitative Research 5 (4): 455–473. doi:10.1177/1468794105056923.
   Google Scholar
• Naples, N. A. 1998. “Bringing Everyday Life to Policy Analysis. The Case of White Rural Women Negotiating College and Welfare.” Journal of Poverty 2 (1): 23–53. doi:10.1300/J134v02n01_02.
   Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, K. 2008. Ethnographic Methods. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Purdue, D. 2001. “Neighborhood Governance: Leadership, Trust and Social Capital.” Urban Studies 38 (12): 2211–2224. doi:10.1080/00420980120087135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smets, P. 2012. “Governance of Liquid Neighborhood Communities and Their Relation with Stakeholders in Amsterdam.” Paper presented at the Second ISA Forum of Sociology, Buenos Aires, August 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw, E. 2005. “Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-Beyond-The-State.” Urban Studies 42 (11): 1991–2006. doi:10.1080/00420980500279869.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toomey, A. H. 2011. “Empowerment and Disempowerment in Community Development Practice: Eight Roles Practitioners Play.” Community Development Journal 46 (2): 181–195. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsp060.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Traynor, B. 2007. “Community Building: Limitatins and Promise.” In The Community Development Reader, edited by J. DeFilippis and S. Saegert, 214–224. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Trommel, W. 2013. “The Birth of the Crafting Community.” Chapter In Crafting Local Welfare Landscapes, edited by D. Bannink, H. Bosselaar, and W. Trommel, 157–171. The Hague: Eleven International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Brink, G., M. Van Hulst, L. De Graaf, and T. Van der Pennen. 2012. Best persons en hun betekenis voor de Nederlandse achterstandswijk [Exemplary Practitioners and Their Significance in Dutch Disadvantaged Neighborhoods]. The Hague: Boom Lemma.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Pennen, T., and G. van Bortel. 2016. “Exemplary Urban Practitioners in Neighborhood Renewal: Survival of the Fittest… and the Fitting.” VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 27 (3): 1323–1342. doi:10.1007/s11266-015-9600-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hulst, M. 2008. “Quite an Experience: Using Ethnography to Study Local Governance.” Critical Policy Analysis 2 (2): 143–159. doi:10.1080/19460171.2008.9518535.
   Google Scholar
• Van Hulst, M., L. De Graaf, and G. Van den Brink. 2011. “Exemplary Practitioners: A Review of Actors Who Make A Difference in Governing.” Administrative Theory and Praxis 33 (1): 120–143. doi:10.2753/ATP1084-1806330110.
   Google Scholar
• Van Hulst, M., L. De Graaf, and G. Van den Brink. 2011. “The Work of Exemplary Practitioners in Neighborhood Governance.” Critical Policy Studies 6 (4): 434–451. doi:10.1080/19460171.2012.730763.
   Google Scholar
• Van Meerkerk, I., and J. Edelenbos. 2014. “The Effects of Boundary Spanners on Trust and Performance of Urban Governance Networks: Findings from Survey Research on Urban Development Projects in the Netherlands.” Policy Sciences 47 (1): 3–24. doi:10.1007/s11077-013-9181-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar