Despite its growing prominence in public administration scholarship, social equity remains insufficiently embedded in local sustainability actions. This study applies an institutional lens to investigate the mechanisms through which sustainability is institutionalized and to assess their impact on equity-oriented actions. Specifically, we investigate four mechanisms of institutionalization: embedding sustainability in formal plans, organizational structure, operational budget and performance evaluation. Drawing on data from a 2015 nationwide survey, we find that embedding sustainability in performance evaluation exerts the greatest influence, followed by task forces, dedicated staffing, and budget allocations, yet the inclusion of sustainability in formal plans fails to drive equity-oriented actions. These findings underscore the importance of institutionalizing sustainability through routine evaluation processes and leveraging flexible, resource-efficient structures to advance social equity. By integrating the institutionalization theory into the analysis of local government equity practices, this study contributes to public administration scholarship and offers actionable insights for policymakers and public managers aiming to promote more inclusive and enduring sustainability development.
AshworthR.BoyneG.DelbridgeR. (2009). Escape from the iron cage? Organizational change and isomorphic pressures in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum038
BarleyS. R.TolbertP. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18(1), 93–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069701800106
4.
BlessettB.DodgeJ.EdmondB.GoerdelH. T.GoodenS. T.HeadleyA. M.WilliamsB. N. (2019). Social equity in public administration: A call to action. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(4), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvz016
5.
BüyüközkanG.KarabulutY. (2018). Sustainability performance evaluation: Literature review and future directions. Journal of Environmental Management, 217, 253–267.
6.
ChenY.XiangT.WangY. (2025). Citizen participation through different mechanisms: Does social media impact adoption and design of local sustainability plans?. Public Management Review, 27(11), 2469–2490.
CouleT.PatmoreB. (2013). Institutional logics, institutional work, and public service innovation in non-profit organizations. Public Administration, 91(4), 980–997. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12005
10.
CriadoJ. I.VillodreJ. (2022). Revisiting social media institutionalization in government. An empirical analysis of barriers. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101643
11.
Den ExterR.LenhartJ.KernK. (2015). Governing climate change in Dutch cities: Anchoring local climate strategies in organisation, policy and practical implementation. Local Environment, 20(9), 1062–1080.
12.
FeeneyM. K.WelchE. W. (2012). Realized publicness at public and private research universities. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 272–284.
13.
FeiockR. C.KrauseR. M.HawkinsC. V. (2017). The impact of administrative structure on the ability of city governments to overcome functional collective action dilemmas: A climate and energy perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(4), 615–628. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux021
14.
FossA. (2018). Divergent responses to sustainability and climate change planning: The role of politics, cultural frames and public participation. Urban Studies, 55(2), 332–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016651554
15.
FredericksonH. G. (1980). New public administration. University Alabama Press.
16.
FredericksonH. G. (1990). Public administration and social equity. Public Administration Review, 50(2). https://doi.org/10.2307/976870
17.
FrumkinP.GalaskiewiczJ. (2004). Institutional isomorphism and public sector organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(3), 283–307. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muh028
18.
FusiF.ZhangF.LiangJ. (2025). From a civic-tech to a problem-centered approach to open government data: Implementation of environmental justice dashboards. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70000
19.
FusiF.ZhangF.WelchE. W. (2023). Intra-organizational communication in public agencies: The effects of contracting out core services. The American Review of Public Administration, 53(5-6), 224–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740231162346
20.
GardnerW.MulveyE. P.ShawE. C. (1995). Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed poisson, and negative binomial models. Psychological Bulletin, 118(3), 392–333.
21.
GoodenS. T. (2017). Social equity and evidence: Insights from local government. Public Administration Review, 77(6), 822–828. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12851
22.
HawkinsC. V.KrauseR. M. (2021). Trends in resource capacity and collaboration for city sustainability: Implications for planning research and practice. Planning Theory and Practice, 22(1), 141–147.
23.
HawkinsC. V.KrauseR. M.DeslatteA. (2023). Staff support and administrative capacity in strategic planning for local sustainability. Public Management Review, 25(5), 879–900.
24.
HilbeJ. M. (2011). Negative binomial regression. Cambridge University Press.
HomsyG. C.WarnerM. E. (2015). Cities and sustainability: Polycentric action and multilevel governance. Urban Affairs Review, 51(1), 46–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087414530545
27.
JiH.DarnallN. (2022). How do external conditions affect the design of local governments’ sustainability strategies?Regulation & Governance, 16(3), 910–929. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12334
28.
KeithT. Z. (2019). Multiple regression and beyond: An introduction to multiple regression and structural equation modeling. Routledge.
29.
KinzerK. (2018). Picking up speed: Public participation and local sustainability plan implementation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 61(9), 1594–1611. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2017.1358154
30.
KrauseR. M.FeiockR. C.HawkinsC. V. (2016). The administrative organization of sustainability within local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(1), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu032
KrollA. (2017). Can performance management foster social equity? Stakeholder power, protective institutions, and minority representation. Public Administration, 95(1), 22–38.
33.
KrollA.MoynihanD. P. (2018). The design and practice of integrating evidence: Connecting performance management with program evaluation. Public Administration Review, 78(2), 183–194.
34.
LiaoL.WarnerM. E.HomsyG. C. (2019). Sustainability’s forgotten third E: What influences local government actions on social equity?Local Environment, 24(12), 1197–1208. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2019.1683725
LylesW.BerkeP.SmithG. (2016). Local plan implementation: Assessing conformance and influence of local plans in the United States. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(2), 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265813515604071
Maynard-MoodyS.MushenoM. (2012). Social equities and inequities in practice: Street-level workers as agents and pragmatists. Public Administration Review, 72(s1), S16–S23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02633.x
39.
MeierK. J.BohteJ. (2001). Structure and discretion: Missing links in representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(4), 455–470. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003511
40.
MeierK. J.NigroL. G. (1976). Representative bureaucracy and policy preferences: A study in the attitudes of federal executives. Public Administration Review, 36(4), 458–469. https://doi.org/10.2307/974854
41.
MergelI.BretschneiderS. I. (2013). A three-stage adoption process for Social Media use in government. Public Administration Review, 73(3), 390–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12021
42.
Meyer-SahlingJ. (2006). The institutionalization of political discretion in post-communist civil service systems: The case of Hungary. Public Administration, 84(3), 693–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00608.x
43.
MoultonS. (2009). Putting together the publicness puzzle: A framework for realized publicness. Public Administration Review, 69(5), 889–900.
44.
OlsenJ. P. (2009). Change and continuity: An institutional approach to institutions of democratic government. European Political Science Review, 1(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773909000022
45.
OppS. M.SaundersK. L. (2013). Pillar talk: Local sustainability initiatives and policies in the United States—finding evidence of the “three e’s”: Economic development, environmental protection, and social equity. Urban Affairs Review, 49(5), 678–717. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087412469344
46.
ParkA. Y.KrauseR. M. (2021). Exploring the landscape of sustainability performance management systems in US local governments. Journal of Environmental Management, 279, 111764.
47.
ParkA. Y.KrauseR. M.HawkinsC. V. (2021). Institutional mechanisms for local sustainability collaboration: Assessing the duality of formal and informal mechanisms in promoting collaborative processes. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 31(2), 434–450. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muaa036
48.
PerriniF.TencatiA. (2006). Sustainability and stakeholder management: The need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems. Business sStrategy and the Environment, 15(5), 296–308.
49.
PradanaI. P. Y. B.KumorotomoW.SusantoE. (2023). The institutionalization of public innovation: Evidence from Indonesia. Administration & Society, 55(4), 726–751. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231151438
50.
Randma-LiivT. (2023). Adoption is not enough: Institutionalization of e-participation initiatives. Public Policy and Administration, 38(3), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767211069199
51.
RawlsJ. (2017). A theory of justice. In Applied ethics (pp. 21–29). Routledge.
52.
ReeseL. A. (2014). If all you have is A hammer: Finding economic development policies that matter. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(6), 627–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074013483166
53.
RomanA. V. (2017). Institutionalizing sustainability: A structural equation model of sustainable procurement in US public agencies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 1048–1059.
54.
RuijerE.PorumbescuG.PorterR.PiotrowskiS. (2023). Social equity in the data era: A systematic literature review of data-driven public service research. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 316–332.
55.
SahaD.PatersonR. G. (2008). Local government efforts to promote the “three es” of sustainable development: Survey in medium to large cities in the United States. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X08321803
56.
SandersonI. (2002). Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Administration, 80(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00292
57.
SchneibergM.SouleS. A. (2005). Institutionalization as a contested, multilevel process: The case of rate regulation in American fire insurance. Social Movements and Organization Theory, 122–160.
58.
ScottW. R. (2014). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests (4th ed.). Sage.
59.
StiversC.PandeyS. K.DeHart-DavisL.HallJ. L.NewcomerK.PortilloS.WrightJ. (2023). Beyond social equity: Talking social justice in public administration. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13620
60.
StritchJ. M.BretschneiderS.DarnallN.HsuehL.ChenY. (2020). Sustainability policy objectives, centralized decision making, and efficiency in public procurement processes in US local governments. Sustainability, 12(17), 6934. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176934
61.
SvaraJ. H.WattT. C.JangH. S. (2013). How are US cities doing sustainability? Who is getting on the sustainability train, and why?Cityscape (Washington, DC), 9–44. https://doi.org/10.2307/41958955
62.
SwannW. L.DeslatteA. (2019). What do we know about urban sustainability? A research synthesis and nonparametric assessment. Urban Studies, 56(9), 1729–1747. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018779713
63.
WangX.HawkinsC.BermanE. (2014). Financing sustainability and stakeholder engagement: Evidence from U.S. Cities. Urban Affairs Review, 50(6), 806–834. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087414522388
64.
WangX.HawkinsC. V.LebredoN.BermanE. M. (2012). Capacity to sustain sustainability: A study of U.S. Cities. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 841–853. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02566.x
65.
WangX.Van WartM.LebredoN. (2014). Sustainability leadership in a local government context: The administrator's role in the process. Public Performance & Management Review, 37(3), 339–364. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576370301
66.
WeingaertnerC.MobergÅ (2014). Exploring social sustainability: Learning from perspectives on urban development and companies and products. Sustainable Development, 22(2), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.536
67.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2016). Introductory econometrics a modern approach. South-Western Cengage Learning.
68.
YetanoA. (2013). What drives the institutionalization of performance measurement and management in local government?Public Performance & Management Review, 37(1), 59–86. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576370103
69.
ZhangF.FeeneyM. K. (2018). Managerial ambivalence and electronic civic engagement: The role of public manager beliefs and perceived needs. Public Administration Review, 78(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12853
70.
ZhangF.WelchE. W. (2022). Explaining Public Organization Adaptation to Climate Change: Configurations of Macro- and Meso-Level Institutional Logics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, muac027, https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac027
