2009
DOI: 10.2495/sdp090492
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Key factors influencing Local Agenda 21 planning approaches

Abstract: Local Agenda 21 as an instrument for sustainable human development at local level is more than fifteen years old. Its original environmental bias has transformed into a multidimensional conception including social and economic change with strong influences on the political realm. Experience shows that many Local Agenda 21 processes do not obtain the expected outcomes due to many external and internal factors that make human sustainable development difficult to materialise at the local level.This paper deals wi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 13 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In that sense, analysis of the different factors influencing LA21 development has been undertaken by many different studies, which have focused on the importance of developing the right ‘culture’ by emphasizing the process rather than the end results (Patton and Worthington, ), participatory practices (Wild and Marshall, ), public participation and community management (Jörby, ), organizational structures and governance institutions (Fidelis and Moreno, ), operational capacity and need for technical and economic support (Garcia‐Sanchez and Prado‐Lorenzo, ), interconnection and integration into wider networks (Echebarría et al , ) or interrelation among actors and enabling learning processes (Calabuig et al , ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In that sense, analysis of the different factors influencing LA21 development has been undertaken by many different studies, which have focused on the importance of developing the right ‘culture’ by emphasizing the process rather than the end results (Patton and Worthington, ), participatory practices (Wild and Marshall, ), public participation and community management (Jörby, ), organizational structures and governance institutions (Fidelis and Moreno, ), operational capacity and need for technical and economic support (Garcia‐Sanchez and Prado‐Lorenzo, ), interconnection and integration into wider networks (Echebarría et al , ) or interrelation among actors and enabling learning processes (Calabuig et al , ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%