Consensus or Conflict? Experiences with Local Agenda 21 Forums in Norway

Harvold, Kjell

doi:10.1080/03003930308559392

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, important benefits could emerge from citizen participation in the shape of: ( i ) more information available for decisions; ( ii ) assessment of alternatives from diverse perspectives; ( iii ) higher legitimacy; ( iv ) conflict reduction; and ( v ) a sense of ownership of LA21 both within and outside of local government and more citizen involvement in implemented actions (Harvold ; Coenen ). These benefits can probably only be perceived after municipalities have experienced citizen participation processes and learnt to run them properly.…”

Section: Model Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing the benefits that emerge from regional sustainability networks: The Castile–La Mancha network of sustainable cities and towns

Echebarria

Barrutia

Aguado

et al. 2016

Papers in Regional Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A great deal of regional research has focused on the innovation-competitivenessgrowth chain, which is implicit in territorial innovation models (TIMs). TIMs literature has neglected or subordinated social and ecological regional conditions. This research adopts a broader perspective by: (i) studying an interscalar intergovernmental network aimed at meeting tridimensional sustainable development (SD) goals; and (ii) showing why this arrangement is successful. The network members are the regional government and provincial councils, which act as network promoters, and the municipalities. We model the network as a platform for integrating both pre-existing idiosyncratic resources and emergent resources/benefits that come from rich and regular interactions (in the shape of learning, enjoyment, reputation, identification, and attitude towards citizen participation); resources integration leads to network member satisfaction. This view is supported by data concerning a network in a Spanish autonomous community (region), Castile-La Mancha. We see this study as a first step towards more systematic research on what might be termed 'territorial sustainability models'. JEL classification: R1, R3, R5

show abstract

Section: Model Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing the benefits that emerge from regional sustainability networks: The Castile–La Mancha network of sustainable cities and towns

Echebarria

Barrutia

Aguado

et al. 2016

Papers in Regional Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In many countries where LA21 has been supported by the national government, such as in Europe (Feichtinger & Pregernig, 2005;Garcia-Sanchez & Prado-Lorenzo, 2008;Harvold, 2003;Lafferty, Knudsen, & Larsen, 2007;Patton & Worthington, 1996;Sancassiani, 2003;Wild & Marshall, 1999), the level of awareness of LA21 and commitment to it in general terms appear high, but there remains only limited evidence of significant changes, obligations, or social costs they create. Besides there has been implementations of Agenda 21 in developing countries such as in Brazil (ICLEI, 1996) and Peru (Steinberg & Miranda, 2005) which have built capacities for local actors and have influenced city's environmental management.…”

Section: Participatory Mechanisms For Sustainable Urban Developmentmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Different from LA21 forum models (Harvold, 2003;Sancassiani, 2003) city councils or stakeholder councils are unique to the Turkish context, in that they are the only mechanism of governance that aims to bring together central government, local government and civil society within a collaborative framework of partnerships. They function as democratic platforms where development priorities and urgent problems of the settlement are determined, discussed and solved.…”

Section: The Organisation Structures and Participatory Mechanisms Of mentioning

confidence: 98%

Local participatory mechanisms and collective actions for sustainable urban development in Turkey

Varol

Ercoşkun

Gürer

2011

Habitat International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For LA21, the practical challenges and constraints for creating radical change included a lack of economic, human, time, and knowledge resources, limited outreach in the actual number of participants and their diversity, legal or regulatory constraints, and the internal compartmentalisation of local governments (Selman and Parker 1997, Eckerberg and Forsberg 1998, Meadowcroft 1999, Evans and Theobald 2003, Harvold 2003, Coenen 2009, Geissel 2009). Transition management faces similar dilemmas, as not all processes were similarly transformative in their outcomes (Wittmayer et al 2013, Roorda andWittmayer 2014, or see Kern and Smith 2008 on the Dutch energy transition).…”

Section: History: Where Do La21 and Transition Management Originate?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the actual LA21 practice, one of the challenges was the limited degree of outreach in the number of participants and their diversity (i.e. underrepresentation of businesses and overrepresentation of environmental groups) (Selman and Parker 1997, Evans and Theobald 2003, Harvold 2003, Coenen 2009, Geissel 2009). This skewed participation led to the interests of certain actors dominating processes, with others being poorly represented or not well versed in deliberating Parker 1997, Coenen 2009).…”

Section: Participants and Initiatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing sustainability: a dialogue between Local Agenda 21 and transition management

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1990s, the local level of governance has become increasingly important in addressing the challenge of sustainable development. In this article, we compare two approaches that seek to address sustainability locally, namely Local Agenda 21 and transition management. Discussing both approaches along six dimensions (history, aim, kind of change, governance understanding, process methodologies, and actors), we formulate general insights into the governance of sustainability in cities, towns, and neighbourhoods. This dialogue illustrates two related modes of thinking about sustainability governance. We touch upon the importance of an integrated perspective on sustainability transitions through which sustainability is made meaningful locally in collaborative processes. We suggest that the explicit orientation towards radical change is a precondition for governing sustainability in a way that addresses the root causes of societal challenges. Governing sustainability should address the tensions between aiming for radical change and working with status quo-oriented actors and governing settings. We conclude that governing sustainability should be about finding creative ways for opening spaces for participation, change, and experimentation, that is, for creating alternative ideas, practices, and social relations. These spaces for innovation encourage a reflexive stance on ways of working and one's own roles and attitudes, thereby preparing a fertile terrain for actors to engage in change from different perspectives.

show abstract

Consensus or Conflict? Experiences with Local Agenda 21 Forums in Norway

Cited by 10 publications

References 8 publications

Capturing the benefits that emerge from regional sustainability networks: The Castile–La Mancha network of sustainable cities and towns

Capturing the benefits that emerge from regional sustainability networks: The Castile–La Mancha network of sustainable cities and towns

Local participatory mechanisms and collective actions for sustainable urban development in Turkey

Governing sustainability: a dialogue between Local Agenda 21 and transition management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About