Between autonomy and embeddedness: project interfaces and institutional change in environmental governance

References

• Bakker, R. M. 2010. “Taking Stock of Temporary Organizational Forms: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda: Temporary Organizational Forms.” International Journal of Management Reviews 12 (4): 466–486. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00281.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakker, R. M., B. Cambré, L. Korlaar, and J. Raab. 2011. “Managing the Project Learning Paradox: A Set-theoretic Approach toward Project Knowledge Transfer.” International Journal of Project Management 29 (5): 494–503. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekkers, V., and L. Tummers. 2018. “Innovation in the Public Sector: Towards an Open and Collaborative Approach.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 84 (2): 209–213. doi:10.1177/0020852318761797.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. 2005. “Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment.” Regional Studies 39 (1): 61–74. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320887.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buffart, M., G. Croidieu, P. H. Kim, and R. Bowman. 2020. “Even Winners Need to Learn: How Government Entrepreneurship Programs Can Support Innovative Ventures.” Research Policy 49 (10): 104052. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2020.104052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, C. M., and M. J. Morley. 2016. “On Temporary Organizations: A Review, Synthesis and Research Agenda.” Human Relations 69 (6): 1235–1258. doi:10.1177/0018726715610809.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, T., and G. M. Stalker. 1961. The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, C.-J., Y.-C. Hsiao, and M.-A. Chu. 2014. “Transfer Mechanisms and Knowledge Transfer: The Cooperative Competency Perspective.” Journal of Business Research 11 2531–2541.
   Google Scholar
• de Vries, H., V. Bekkers, and L. Tummers. 2014. “Innovation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review and Future Research.” Public Administration 320090(320090). doi:10.1111/padm.12209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, John S., and Jonathan Pickering. 2019. The Politics of the Anthropocene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198809616.003.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Dunlop, C. A., and C. M. Radaelli. 2013. “Systematising Policy Learning: From Monolith to Dimensions.” Political Studies 61 (3): 599–619. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00982.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunlop, C. A., and C. M. Radaelli. 2017. “Learning in the Bath-tub: The Micro and Macro Dimensions of the Causal Relationship between Learning and Policy Change.” Policy and Society 36 (2): 304–319. doi:10.1080/14494035.2017.1321232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engwall, M. 2003. “No Project Is an Island: Linking Projects to History and Context.” Research Policy 32 (5): 789–808. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00088-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 2013. “Critical Discourse Analysis and Critical Policy Studies.” Critical Policy Studies 7 (2): 177–197. doi:10.1080/19460171.2013.798239.
   Google Scholar
• Forester, J. 2009. Dealing with Differences: Dramas of Mediating Public Disputes. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Godenhjelm, S. 2016. Project Organisations and Governance – Processes, Actors, Actions, and Participatory Procedures. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Political and Economic Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Godenhjelm, S., and J.-E. Johanson. 2018. “The Effect of Stakeholder Inclusion on Public Sector Project Innovation.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 84 (1): 42–62. doi:10.1177/0020852315620291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godenhjelm, S., R. A. Lundin, and S. Sjöblom. 2015. “Projectification in the Public Sector – The Case of the European Union.” International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 8 (2): 324–348. doi:10.1108/IJMPB-05-2014-0049.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabher, G. 2004a. “Learning in Projects, Remembering in Networks?” European Urban and Regional Studies 11 (2): 103–123. doi:10.1177/0969776404041417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabher, G. 2004b. “Temporary Architectures of Learning: Knowledge Governance in Project Ecologies.” Organization Studies 25 (9): 1491–1514. doi:10.1177/0170840604047996.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guest, G., K. MacQueen, and E. Namey. 2012. Applied Thematic Analysis. Online: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi:10.4135/9781483384436.
   Google Scholar
• Hodge, I., and W. Adams. 2016. “Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration.” Land 5 (4): 39. doi:10.3390/land5040039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodgson, D. E. 2004. “Project Work: The Legacy of Bureaucratic Control in the Post-Bureaucratic Organization.” Organization 11 (1): 81–100. doi:10.1177/1350508404039659.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodgson, G. M. 2006. “What Are Institutions?” Journal of Economic Issues 40 (1): 1–25. doi:10.1080/00213624.2006.11506879.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooghe, L., and G. Marks. 2001. “Types of Multi-Level Governance.” European Integration Online Papers 5 (11). doi:10.2139/ssrn.302786.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsson, M., T. Burström, and T. L. Wilson. 2013. “The Role of Transition in Temporary Organizations: Linking the Temporary to the Permanent.” International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 6 (3): 576–586. doi:10.1108/IJMPB-12-2011-0081.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsson, M., R. A. Lundin, and A. Söderholm. 2015. “Researching Projects and Theorizing Families of Temporary Organizations.” Project Management Journal 46 (October/November): 9–18. doi:10.1002/pmj.21520.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, C., S. Johansson, and M. Löfström. 2018. “Policy Implementation in the Era of Accelerating Projectification: Synthesizing Matland’s Conflict–ambiguity Model and Research on Temporary Organizations.” Public Policy and Administration 33 (4): 447–465. doi:10.1177/0952076717702957.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang, J., M. Rhee, and K. H. Kang. 2010. “Revisiting Knowledge Transfer: Effects of Knowledge Characteristics on Organizational Effort for Knowledge Transfer.” Expert Systems with Applications 37 (12): 8155–8160. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapsali, M. 2011. “Systems Thinking in Innovation Project Management: A Match that Works.” International Journal of Project Management 29 (4): 396–407. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.01.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovach, I., and E. Kucerova. 2006. “The Project Class in Central Europe: The Czech and Hungarian Cases.” Sociologia Ruralis 46 (1): 3–21. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00403.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronsell, A., and D. Mukhtar-Landgren. 2018. “Experimental Governance: The Role of Municipalities in Urban Living Labs.” European Planning Studies 26 (5): 988–1007. doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1435631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leta, G., G. Kelboro, K. Van Assche, T. Stellmacher, and A.-K. Hornidge. 2020. “Rhetorics and Realities of Participation: The Ethiopian Agricultural Extension System and Its Participatory Turns.” Critical Policy Studies 14 (4): 388–407. doi:10.1080/19460171.2019.1616212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, T. M. 2016. “Governing Rural Indonesia: Convergence on the Project System.” Critical Policy Studies 10 (1): 79–94. doi:10.1080/19460171.2015.1098553.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundin, R. A., N. Arvidsson, T. Brady, E. Ekstedt, C. Midler, and J. Sydow. 2015. Managing and Working in Project Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lundin, R. A., and A. Söderholm. 1995. “A Theory of the Temporary Organization.” Scandinavian Journal of Management 11 (4): 437–455. doi:10.1016/0956-5221(95)00036-U.
   Google Scholar
• Mats, F. 2015. “Projectification in Swedish Municipalities. A Case of Porous Organizations.” Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration 19 (2). http://ojs.ub.gu.se/ojs/index.php/sjpa/article/view/3143.
   Google Scholar
• Mergel, I., Y. Gong, and J. Bertot. 2018. “Agile Government: Systematic Literature Review and Future Research.” Government Information Quarterly 35 (2): 291–298. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2018.04.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mettler, Suzanne, and Sorelle, Mallory. 2018. ”Policy Feedback Theory” In Weible, Christopher M., Sabatier, Paul A.Theories of the Policy Process, 4th Edition. New York: Routlege. 416 pages. 9780429494284
   Google Scholar
• Michaud, G. 2019. “Punctuating the Equilibrium: A Lens to Understand Energy and Environmental Policy Changes.” International Journal of Energy Research 43 (8): 3053–3057. doi:10.1002/er.4464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, P. W. G. 1997. “Managing Project Interfaces—Key Points for Project Success.” In Project Management Handbook, edited by D. I. Cleland and W. R. King, 16–55. New York: John Wiley & Sons, . doi:10.1002/9780470172353.ch2.
   Google Scholar
• Munck Af Rosenschöld, J. 2019. “Inducing Institutional Change through Projects? Three Models of Projectified Governance.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 21 (4): 333–344. doi:10.1080/1523908X.2019.1606702.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munck Af Rosenschöld, J., and S. A. Wolf. 2017. “Toward Projectified Environmental Governance?” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 49 (2): 273–292. doi:10.1177/0308518X16674210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Mahony, S., and B. A. Bechky. 2008. “Boundary Organizations: Enabling Collaboration among Unexpected Allies.” Administrative Science Quarterly 53 (3): 422–459. doi:10.2189/asqu.53.3.422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papadopoulou, E., N. Hasanagas, and D. Harvey. 2011. “Analysis of Rural Development Policy Networks in Greece: Is LEADER Really Different?” Land Use Policy 28 (4): 663–673. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.11.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pisani, E., E. Andriollo, M. Masiero, and L. Secco. 2020. “Intermediary Organisations in Collaborative Environmental Governance: Evidence of the EU-funded LIFE Sub-programme for the Environment (LIFE-ENV).” Heliyon 6 (7): e04251. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plummer, R., and D. Armitage. 2010. “Integrating Perspectives on Adaptive Capacity and Environmental Governance.” In Adaptive Capacity and Environmental Governance, edited by D. Armitage and R. Plummer, 1–19. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-12194-4_1.
   Google Scholar
• Plummer, R., A. Dzyundzyak, J. Baird, Ö. Bodin, D. Armitage, L. Schultz, and A. Belgrano. 2017. “How Do Environmental Governance Processes Shape Evaluation of Outcomes by Stakeholders? A Causal Pathways Approach.” PLOS ONE 12 (9): e0185375. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0185375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ray C. (2000). Editorial. The eu leader Programme: Rural Development Laboratory. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(2), 163–171. 10.1111/1467-9523.00138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Repetto, R. ed. 2006. By Fits and Starts: Punctuated Equilibrium and the Dynamics of US Environmental Policy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. A. W. 2008. “Policy Network Analysis.“ In The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, edited by Goodin, Robert E., Moran, Michael and Martin, Rein, 425–443. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Riis, E., M. M. Hellström, and K. Wikström. 2019. “Governance of Projects: Generating Value by Linking Projects with Their Permanent Organisation.” International Journal of Project Management 37 (5): 652–667. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.01.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabel, C. F., and W. H. Simon. 2011. “Minimalism and Experimentalism in the Administrative State.” SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.1600898.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöblom, S., K. Andersson, and S. Skerratt. 2016. Sustainability and Short-term Policies: Improving Governance in Spatial Policy Interventions. New York: Taylor and Francis. http://public.ebookcentral.proquest.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=4468597.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöblom, S., and S. Godenhjelm. 2009. “Project Proliferation and Governance-implications for Environmental Management.” Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 11 (3): 169–185. doi:10.1080/15239080903033762.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöblom, S., K. Löfgren, and S. Godenhjelm. 2013. “Projectified Politics – Temporary Organisations in a Public Context.” Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration 17 (2): 3–12.
   Google Scholar
• Soe, R. M., and W. Drechsler. 2018. “Agile Local Governments: Experimentation before Implementation.” Government Information Quarterly 35 (2): 323–335. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2017.11.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, Y., D. R. Gnyawali, M. K. Srivastava, and E. Asgari. 2018. “In Search of Precision in Absorptive Capacity Research: A Synthesis of the Literature and Consolidation of Findings.” Journal of Management 44 (6): 2343–2374. doi:10.1177/0149206318773861.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suškevičs, M., T. Hahn, R. Rodela, B. Macura, and C. Pahl-Wostl. 2018. “Learning for Social-ecological Change: A Qualitative Review of Outcomes across Empirical Literature in Natural Resource Management.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 61 (7): 1085–1112. doi:10.1080/09640568.2017.1339594.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torre, A. 2014. “Proximity Relationships and Entrepreneurship: Some Reflections Based on an Applied Case Study.” Journal of Innovation Economics 14 (2): 83. doi:10.3917/jie.014.0083.
   Google Scholar
• Torre, A., and B. Zuindeau. 2009. “Proximity Economics and Environment: Assessment and Prospects.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1080/09640560802504613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukiainen, S., and N. Granqvist. 2016. “Temporary Organizing and Institutional Change.” Organization Studies 37 (12): 1819–1840. doi:10.1177/0170840616662683.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Buuren, A., and D. Loorbach. 2009. “Policy Innovation in Isolation?: Conditions for Policy Renewal by Transition Arenas and Pilot Projects.” Public Management Review 11 (3): 375–392. doi:10.1080/14719030902798289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varumo, L., Paloniemi, R. and Kelemen, E. 2020. “Challenges and solutions in developing legitimate online participation for EU biodiversity and ecosystem services policies.“ Science and Public Policy 47 (4): 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vihma, P., and A. Toikka. 2021. “Limits of Collaborative Governance: The Role of Inter-group Learning and Trust in the Case of the Estonian “Forest War”.” Environmental Policy and Governance 31 (1): 403–416. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/eet.1952
   Google Scholar
• Wehn, U., and C. Montalvo. 2018. “Knowledge Transfer Dynamics and Innovation: Behaviour, Interactions and Aggregated Outcomes.” Journal of Cleaner Production 171: S56–S68. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.198.
   Google Scholar
• Westberg, L., and M. Polk. 2016. “The Role of Learning in Transdisciplinary Research: Moving from a Normative Concept to an Analytical Tool through a Practice-based Approach.” Sustainability Science 11 (3): 385–397. doi:10.1007/s11625-016-0358-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young-Hyman, T. 2017. “Cooperating without Co-laboring: How Formal Organizational Power Moderates Cross-functional Interaction in Project Teams.” Administrative Science Quarterly 62 (1): 179–214. doi:10.1177/0001839216655090.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, J. C., Jordan, A., Searle, K. R., Butler, A., Chapman, D. S., Simmons, P. and Watt, A. D. 2013. “Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation?“ Biological Conservation 158 (February): 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.08.018.
   Google Scholar