Institutional Collective Actions for Culture and Heritage-Led Urban Regeneration: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis

被引:2
作者
Piperno, Alessandro [1 ]
Iaione, Christian [2 ]
Kappler, Luna [2 ]
机构
[1] Luiss Univ, Dept Business & Management, I-00197 Rome, Italy
[2] Luiss Univ, Dept Law, I-00197 Rome, Italy
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
institutional collective actions; urban regeneration; Faro Convention; heritage community; fsQCA; heritage co-governance; civic entrepreneurship; institutional capacity; COMPARATIVE-ANALYSIS QCA; INFORMAL INSTITUTIONS; DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS; NETWORK GOVERNANCE; SOCIAL-SERVICES; 3RD SECTOR; ENTREPRENEURSHIP; CAPACITY; COPRODUCTION; STRATEGY;
D O I
10.3390/su15118521
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Institutional collective actions (ICAs) provide a fascinating framework for comprehending collaborative urban initiatives. We defined ICAs as groups of people and organizations working together to promote a shared goal they could not pursue on their own. This study provides an empirical justification of why particular characteristics support the success of ICAs and why others fail. We restrict our analysis to culture-and-heritage-led urban regeneration initiatives and analyze the combinations of conditions under which these initiatives achieve their objectives. Adopting an integrated strategy, we studied prerequisites and critical elements that affect the success of collaborative actions, such as entrepreneurship, the enabling role of institutional capacity, multi-stakeholder involvement, and co-governance. Therefore, we compared sixteen culture-and-heritage-led urban regeneration initiatives in Europe as examples of ICAs in the urban context. We utilized fsQCA, fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis, as a method that enabled us to define the configurations (combinations of factors) that determine the performances of urban regeneration actions. The results demonstrate that a variety of elements are necessary for developing collaborative initiatives and that three different recipes can be developed. In addition, this study contributes to the body of knowledge on institutional collective actions in two ways: (1) by providing empirical evidence of why specific conditions need to be considered when developing collective actions and (2) by showing how specific conditions interact and explain the performance of ICAs.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 142 条
[31]   The Evolution of Community Self-Organization in Interaction With Government Institutions: Cross-Case Insights From Three Countries [J].
Edelenbos, Jurian ;
van Meerkerk, Ingmar ;
Schenk, Todd .
AMERICAN REVIEW OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 2018, 48 (01) :52-66
[32]   Multi-actor Resource Integration: A Service Approach in Public Management [J].
Eriksson, Erik ;
Hellstrom, Andreas .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 2021, 32 (02) :456-472
[33]   Formal and informal institutions under codecision:: Continuous constitution-building in Europe [J].
Farrell, H ;
Héritier, A .
GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLICY ADMINISTRATION AND INSTITUTIONS, 2003, 16 (04) :577-600
[34]   Explaining Governance Outcomes: Epistemology, Network Governance and Policy Network Analysis [J].
Fawcett, Paul ;
Daugbjerg, Carsten .
POLITICAL STUDIES REVIEW, 2012, 10 (02) :195-207
[35]   A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations [J].
Fiss, Peer C. .
ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2007, 32 (04) :1180-1198
[36]   Opposites Attract? Opportunities and Challenges for Integrating Large-N QCA and Econometric Analysis [J].
Fiss, Peer C. ;
Sharapov, Dmitry ;
Cronqvist, Lasse .
POLITICAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 2013, 66 (01) :191-198
[37]   Modeling the structure of collective action [J].
Flanagin, AJ ;
Stohl, C ;
Bimber, B .
COMMUNICATION MONOGRAPHS, 2006, 73 (01) :29-54
[38]  
Foster S.R., 2016, CHAPTER I4 HUMAN RIG, P43, DOI [10.4337/9781783477616.I.4, DOI 10.4337/9781783477616.I.4]
[39]  
Foster S.R., 2022, COCITIES
[40]  
Foster Sheila., 2015, SSRN ELECT J, DOI DOI 10.2139/SSRN.2653084