Cities,institutional entrepreneurship and the emergence of new environmental policies: The organizing of waste prevention in the City of Gothenburg,Sweden
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2019
Cities,institutional entrepreneurship and the emergence of new environmental policies: The organizing of waste prevention in the City of Gothenburg,Sweden
Informed by institutional entrepreneurship theory and based on the case of waste prevention projects in the City of Göteborg, this paper examines the role of cities in shaping new environmental policies. Structured by the research question, ‘How do cities shape novel environmental policies and practices?’, the paper illustrates how cities become agents of environmental change and institutional entrepreneurship through mobilizing and recombining resources (i.e. human, financial, and spatial), rationales (by reframing symbols, challenging taboos, and transforming waste socio-materialities), and relations (via internal and external collaboration and by creating new institutional arrangements, roles, and expectations). Emerging environmental policies, such as waste prevention, represent the structuring of an incipient environmental policy field. This new generation of environmental policies expands the scope of the public sector (the so-called publicness), reshapes the public/private distinction, and challenges taboos such as the intrusion of publicness into privateness.
AmundsenHBerglundFWestskogH (2010)
Overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation—A question of multilevel governance?Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy28: 276–289.
2.
BozemanB (1987) All Organizations are Public: Bridging Public and Private Organizational Theories.
San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
3.
BulkeleyH (2010)
Cities and the governing of climate change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources35: 229–253.
4.
BulkeleyHBetsillMM (2013)
Revisiting the urban politics of climate change. Environmental Politics22(1): 136–154.
5.
BulkeleyHCastán BrotoV (2013)
Government by experiment? Global cities and the governing of climate change. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers38: 361–375.
6.
BulkeleyHCastán BrotoV (2014)
Urban experiments and climate change: Securing zero carbon development in Bangalore. Contemporary Social Science9(4): 393–414.
7.
BulkeleyHSchroederH (2011)
Beyond state/non-state divides: Global cities and the governing of climate change. European Journal of International Relations18(4): 743–766.
8.
Castán BrotoVOballaBJuniorP (2013)
Governing climate change for a just city: Challenges and lessons from Maputo, Mozambique. Local Environment18(6): 678–704.
9.
City of Göteborg (2013a) Plan for the Prioritized Goals of the City of Göteborg, Resource Economizing will Increase.
Göteborg:
The City of Göteborg.
10.
City of Göteborg (2013b) Resource Economizing Will Increase. Mapping of Waste Streams in the City of Göteborg, and Measures.
Göteborg:
The City of Göteborg.
City of Göteborg, Göteborg Water and Waste Department (2013) Waste-Prevention Plan – Increasing the Keeping of Resources [Avfallsförebyggandeplan – Resurshushållningen ska o¨ka]. Göteborg: City of Göteborg document.
14.
CorvellecHandCzarniawskaB (2015) Action nets for waste prevention. In: EkströmKM (ed) Waste Management and Sustainable Consumption: Reflection on Consumer Waste.
Oxford:
Earthscan-Routledge, pp.88–101.
15.
CorvellecHEkRJohanssonNet al. (2018) Avfallsförebyggande handlar om effektiv produktion och genomtänkt konsumtion – Inte om avfall. Sju lärdomar från forskningsprojektet från avfallshantering till avfallsförebyggande [Waste Prevention is about Efficient Production and Thought-Through Consumption – Not about Waste. Seven Lessons from the Research Project ‘From Waste Management to Waste Prevention’].
Lund:
Department of Service Management, Lund University.
16.
CorvellecHZapata CamposMJZapataP (2013)
Infrastructures, lock-in, and sustainable urban development: The case of waste incineration in the Göteborg Metropolitan Area. Journal of Cleaner Production50: 32–39.
17.
CorvellecRZapataPZapataet al. (2015)
Tre av fyra jobbar med förebyggande [Three our of four works preventive]. Avfall Och Miljö [Waste and Environment Magazine]1(33): 1: 33.
18.
CzarniawskaB (2002) A Tale of Three Cities: Or the Globalization of City Management.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
19.
Czarniawska-JoergesBandJoergesB (1996) The travel of ideas. In: Czarniawska-JoergesBSevónG (eds) Translating Organizational Change.
Berlin:
de Gruyter, pp.13–48.
20.
DiMaggioPJPowellW (1983)
The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review48: 147–160.
21.
DouglasM (1966) Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo.
London:
Routledge.
22.
European Commission, 2008/98/EC.
Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and the Council on waste and repealing certain documents. Official Journal of the European UnionL312: 3.
23.
GarudRJainSKumaraswamyA (2002)
Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal45: 196–114.
24.
GeertzC (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays by Clifford Geertz.
New York:
Basic Books Inc.
GreenHackGBG (2015) I promise to eat vegetarian five days a week. Available at: http://greenhackgbg.se/2015/12/ (accessed 11 June 2018).
27.
GreenwoodRHiningsCR (1996)
Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review21: 1022–1054.
28.
GreenwoodRSuddabyR (2006)
Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal49(1): 27–28.
29.
HardyC (1985)
The nature of unobtrusive power. Journal of Management Studies22: 384–399.
30.
HardyCMaguireS (2008) Institutional entrepreneurship. In: GreenROliverCSahlinKet al. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. London: SAGE, 198–217.
31.
HardyCMaguireS (2017) Institutional entrepreneurship and change in fields. In: GreenwoodROliverCLawrenceTBet al. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism.
London:
SAGE, pp.261–280.
32.
HermansenEAT (2015)
Policy window entrepreneurship: The backstage of the world’s largest REDD+ initiative. Environmental Politics24(6): 932–950.
33.
HjorthD (2005)
Organizational entrepreneurship: With de Certeau on creating heterotopias (or spaces for play). Journal of Management Inquiry14: 386–398.
34.
HodsonMMarvinS (2009)
‘Urban Ecological Security’: A new urban paradigm?International Journal of Urban and Regional Research33: 193–215.
35.
HodsonMMarvinSRobinsonBet al. (2014) Urban dematerialization and transitions analysis. In: HodsonMMarvinS (eds) After Sustainable Cities?
Abingdon:
Routledge, pp.59–73.
36.
HoffmanAJ (1999)
Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal42: 351–371.
37.
HoffmanAJJenningsPD (2015)
Institutional theory and the natural environment: Research in (and on) the Anthropocene. Environment & Organization28(1): 8–31.
38.
HolmbergJLarssonJNäSsénJet al. (2012) Klimatomsta¨llningen och det goda livet. Stockholm: Naturvårdsverket.
39.
HultmanJCorvellecH (2012)
The European waste hierarchy: From the sociomateriality of waste to a politics of consumption. Environment and Planning A44(10): 2413–2427.
40.
JacobssonBPierreJSundströmG (2015) Governing the Embedded State: The Organizational Dimension of Governance.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
41.
JuholaSHaanpaaSPeltonenL (2012)
Regional challenges of climate change adaptation in Finland: Examining the ability to adapt in the absence of national level steering. Local Environment17(6–7): 629–639.
42.
JuholaSKeskitaloEWesterhoffL (2011)
Understanding the framings of climate change adaptation across multiple scales of governance in Europe. Environmental Politics20(4): 445–463.
43.
KarvonenAEvansJvan HeurB (2014) The politics of urban experiments: Radical change or business as usual? In: HodsonMSimonM (eds) After Sustainable Cities?
Abingdon:
Routledge, pp.104–115.
44.
KokMTJde ConinckHC (2007)
Widening the scope of policies to address climate change: Directions for mainstreaming. Environmental Science and Policy10: 587–599.
45.
LawrenceTBPhilipsN (2004)
From Moby Dick to Free Willy: Macro-cultural discourse and institutional entrepreneurship in emerging institutional fields. Organization11: 689–711.
46.
LounsburyMVentrescaMHirschP (2003)
Social movements, field frames, and industry emergence: A cultural-political perspective on U.S. recycling.Socio-Economic Review1(1): 71–104.
47.
LövbrandEStrippleJ (2012)
Disrupting the public–private distinction: Excavating the government of carbon markets post-Copenhagen. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy30: 658–674.
MaguireSHardyCLawrenceTB (2004)
Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal47(5): 657–679.
50.
MeyerJWRowanB (1977)
Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology83(2): 340–363.
51.
PeschU (2015)
Publicness, privateness, and the management of pollution. Ethics, Policy & Environment18(1): 79–95.
52.
PowellWWDiMaggioPJ (1991) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis.
Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
53.
RogersEM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations.
New York:
Free Press.
54.
SchneibergMLounsburyM (2008) Social movements and institutional analysis. In: GreenwoodROliverCSahlinKet al. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism.
London:
SAGE, pp.650–672.
55.
SchurzG (2008)
Patterns of abduction. Synthese164(2): 201–234.
56.
ScottWR (2008) Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests. 3rd ed.
Los Angeles:
SAGE.
57.
SnowDABenfordRD (1988) Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. In: KlandermansBKriesiHTarrowS (eds) From Structure to Action: Social Movement Participation across Cultures.
Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press, pp.197–217.
58.
SonerydLUgglaY (2015)
Green governmentality and responsibilization: New forms of governance and responses to ‘consumer responsibility’. Environmental Politics24(6): 913–931.
59.
StraussALCorbinJM (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques.
Newbury Park, CA:
SAGE.
60.
SuchmanMC (1995)
Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review20: 571–610.
61.
SundinETillmarM (2008)
A nurse and a civil servant changing institutions: Entrepreneurial processes in different public sector organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Management24: 113–124.
TorfingJPetersGPierreJet al. (2012) Interactive Governance. Advancing the Paradigm.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
64.
UNEP (2010) Waste and Climate Change. Global Trends and Strategy Framework.
Osaka:
UNEP.
65.
WejsA (2014)
Integrating climate change into governance at the municipal scale: An institutional perspective on practices in Denmark. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy32: 1017–1035.
66.
WejsAHarvoldKVammen LarsenSet al. (2014)
Legitimacy building in weak institutional settings: Climate change adaptation at local level in Denmark and Norway. Environmental Politics23(3): 490–508.
67.
WhileAJonasAEGGibbsD (2010)
From sustainable development to carbon control: Eco-state restructuring and the politics of urban and regional development. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers35: 76–93.
68.
WilsonDC(ed) (2015) Global Waste Management Outlook (GWMO).
Nairobi:
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).
69.
YinRK (2014) Case Study Research: Design and Methods.
London:
SAGE.
70.
Zapata CamposMJHallCM (eds) (2013) Organising Waste in the City: International Perspectives on Narratives and Practices.
Bristol:
The Policy Press.
