Sustainable local development: consolidated framework for cross-sectoral cooperation via a systematic approach

dc.creatorMarín-González, Freddy
dc.creatorRani Moganadas, Sharmila
dc.creatorParedes, Ana Judith
dc.creatorYEO, SOOK FERN
dc.creatorSubramaniam, Subhacini
dc.date2022-07-01T20:48:33Z
dc.date2022-07-01T20:48:33Z
dc.date2022-05-27
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-03T19:19:11Z
dc.date.available2023-10-03T19:19:11Z
dc.identifierMarín-González, F.; Moganadas, S.R.; Paredes-Chacín, A.J.; Yeo, S.F.; Subramaniam, S. Sustainable Local Development: Consolidated Framework for Cross-Sectoral Cooperation via a Systematic Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6601. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116601
dc.identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/11323/9326
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.3390/su14116601
dc.identifier10.3390/su14116601
dc.identifier2071-1050
dc.identifierCorporación Universidad de la Costa
dc.identifierREDICUC - Repositorio CUC
dc.identifierhttps://repositorio.cuc.edu.co/
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/9169514
dc.descriptionCross-sectoral cooperation (CSC) has gained recognition as the key to achieving sustainable development goals within a locality. However, existing studies focused on sustainable local development (SLD) initiatives resulting from CSC remain sparse. This article aims to review the CSC–SLD literature, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method. Research questions were constructed using the PICOC (population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and context) structure. The identification of scientific works occurred through the search of relevant keywords, which resulted in a final set of 38 peer-reviewed manuscripts, from 1994 to 2021. First, the main driving forces for adopting CSC, to achieve SLD, which are dispersed at multiple levels, were captured and contextualised into the micro-, meso-, macro- and mega-framework. Second, salient aspects addressed in the literature for effective CSC implementation were identified and classified into approaches, governance, structure, key actors, psychological and social aspects, and experiences themes. This resulted in a consolidated guiding principles framework for implementing CSC, to pursue SLD. Additionally, the use of theories in different aspects of CSC–SLD initiatives was discussed. This study informs the practitioners, policy-makers, and researchers the fundamentals that need to be considered when planning, designing, and implementing effective CSC interventions for SLD.
dc.format33 páginas
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherMDPI AG
dc.publisherSwitzerland
dc.relationSustainability
dc.relation1. Cracolici, M.F.; Cuffaro, M.; Nijkamp, P. The measurement of economic, social and environmental performance of countries: A novel approach. Soc. Indic. Res. 2010, 95, 339. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
dc.relation2. Mohamed, E. Economic, Social, and Environmental Dimensions of Development in Sudan. In Perspectives on Economic DevelopmentPublic Policy, Culture, and Economic Development; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020.
dc.relation3. Mensah, J.; Ricart Casadevall, S. Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent Soc. Sci. 2019, 5, 1653531. [CrossRef]
dc.relation4. Holden, E.; Linnerud, K.; Banister, D.; Schwanitz, V.J.; Wierling, A. The Imperatives of Sustainable Development: Needs, Justice, Limits; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2017.
dc.relation5. Hoselitz, B.F. Sociological Aspects of Economic Growth; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1960.
dc.relation6. Rabie, M. A Theory of Sustainable Sociocultural and Economic Development; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016.
dc.relation7. Gupta, J.; Vegelin, C. Sustainable development goals and inclusive development. Int. Environ. Agreem. 2016, 16, 433–448. [CrossRef]
dc.relation8. Mwebesa, M.E.; Yoh, K.; Doi, K. Developing the logical cross-sectoral framework of local SDGs project targeting safety and sustainability. IATSS Res. 2021, 45, 49–59. [CrossRef]
dc.relation9. Reyes, G.E. Four main theories of development: Modernization, dependency, word-system, and globalization. Nómadas. Rev. Crít. Cienc. Soc. Juríd. 2021, 4, 109–124.
dc.relation10. Rogers, E.M. Communication and development: The passing of the dominant paradigm. Commun. Res. 1976, 3, 213–240. [CrossRef]
dc.relation11. Todaro, M. Economic Development; Longmans: Harlow, UK, 1977.
dc.relation12. Sun, X.; Clarke, A.; MacDonald, A. Implementing community sustainability plans through partnership: Examining the relationship between partnership structural features and climate change mitigation outcomes. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6172. [CrossRef]
dc.relation13. Eisenmenger, N.; Pichler, M.; Nora, K.; Noll, D.; Plank, B.; Schalmann, E.; Wandi, M.T.; Gingrich, S. The sustainable development goals prioritize economic growth over sustainable resource use: A critical reflection on the SDGs from a socio-ecological perspective. Sustain. Sci. 2020, 15, 1101–1110. [CrossRef]
dc.relation14. OECD. The DAC Guidelines Strategies for Sustainable Development: Guidance for Development Co-Operation; OECD: Paris, France, 2001.
dc.relation15. Shi, L.; Han, L.; Yang, F.; Gao, L. The evolution of sustainable development theory: Types, goals, and research prospects. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7158. [CrossRef]
dc.relation16. Marín-González, F.; Senior-Naveda, A.; Castro, M.N.; González, A.I.; Chacín, A.J.P. Knowledge network for sustainable local development. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1124. [CrossRef]
dc.relation17. Boas, I.; Biermann, F.; Kanie, N. Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability governance: Towards a nexus approach. Int. Environ. Agreem. 2016, 16, 449–464. [CrossRef]
dc.relation18. Moallemi, E.A.; Malekpour, S.; Hadjikakou, M.; Raven, R.; Szetey, K.; Ningrum, D.; Dhiaulhaq, A.; Bryan, B.A. Achieving the sustainable development goals requires transdisciplinary innovation at the local scale. One Earth 2020, 3, 300–313. [CrossRef]
dc.relation19. Hornby, A.S. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015.
dc.relation20. Sekuła, A. Local Development–The Definition Aspect in the 21st Century. Politechnika Rzeszowska, Rzeszów. 2002. Available online: https://depot.ceon.pl/handle/123456789/4447 (accessed on 25 August 2021).
dc.relation21. Milán-García, J.; Uribe-Toril, J.; Ruiz-Real, J.L.; De Pablo Valenciano, J. Sustainable local development: An overview of the state of knowledge. Resources 2019, 8, 31. [CrossRef]
dc.relation22. Randhir, T.O. Globalization impacts on local commons: Multiscale strategies for socioeconomic and ecological resilience. Int. J. Commons 2016, 10, 387–404. [CrossRef]
dc.relation23. Meyer, W.; Naidoo, I.; D’Errico, S.; Hofer, S.; Bajwa, M.; Pérez, L.A.T.; El-Saddick, K.; Lucks, D.; Simon, B.; Piergallini, I. VNR Reporting Needs Evaluation: A Call for Global Guidance and National Action. Policy and Planning. 2018. Available online: http://pubs.iied.org/17446IIED (accessed on 3 December 2021).
dc.relation24. Oosterhof, P.D. Localizing the sustainable development goals to accelerate implementation of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Asian Dev. Bank 2018. [CrossRef]
dc.relation25. Krantz, V.; Gustafsson, S. Localizing the sustainable development goals through an integrated approach in municipalities: Early experiences from a Swedish forerunner. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2021, 64, 2641–2660. [CrossRef]
dc.relation26. Stiglitz, J.E. Making Globalization Work; WW Norton & Company: New York, NY, USA, 2007.
dc.relation27. Jain, A.; Courvisanos, J.; Subramaniam, N. Localisation of the sustainable development goals in an emerging nation. Public Admin. Dev. 2021, 41, 231–243. [CrossRef]
dc.relation28. Mohieldin,M. The Sustainable Development Goals and Private Sector Opportunities. World Bank Group. 2017. Available online: https://thedocs. worldbank.org/en/doc/394231501877501769-0270022017/original/TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsandPrivateSectorOpportunities. pdf (accessed on 4 October 2021).
dc.relation29. Kritz, J. Effective cross-sector collaborations create sustainability. Lancet Glob. Health 2018, 6, e952–e953. [CrossRef]
dc.relation30. Tosun, J.; Lang, A. Policy integration: Mapping the different concepts. Policy Stud. 2017, 38, 553–570. [CrossRef]
dc.relation31. Jordan, A.; Lenschow, A. Environmental policy integration: A state of the art review. Environ. Policy Gov. 2010, 20, 147–158. [CrossRef]
dc.relation32. Kim, S.Y.; Swann, W.L.; Weible, C.M.; Bolognesi, T.; Krause, R.M.; Park, A.Y.; Tang, T.; Maletsky, K.; Feiock, R.C. Updating the institutional collective action framework. Policy Stud. J. 2022, 50, 9–34. [CrossRef]
dc.relation33. Bolognesi, T.; Metz, F.; Nahrath, S. Institutional complexity traps in policy integration processes: A long-term perspective on Swiss flood risk management. Policy Sci. 2021, 54, 911–941. [CrossRef]
dc.relation34. Seville Commitment (25–27 February 2019) Cementing a Local-Global Movement to Localizing the Sustainable Development Goals, Sevilla, Spain. Available online: https://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/seville_commitment._27_02_2019.pdf (accessed on 4 October 2021).
dc.relation35. Hämäläinen, R.M.; Aro, A.R.; Lau, C.J.; Rus, D.; Cori, L.; Syed, A.M. Cross-sector cooperation in health-enhancing physical activity policymaking: More potential than achievements? Health Res. Policy Syst. 2016, 14, 1–12. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
dc.relation36. Arbeiter, J.; Buˇcar, M. Cross-sectoral cooperation. Bridge 47. 2021. Available online: https://www.tepsa.eu/cross-sectoralcooperation-for-sustainable-futures-jana-arbeiter-and-maja-bucar-cir-slovenia/ (accessed on 30 December 2021).
dc.relation37. Klein, M.; Spychalska-Wojtkiewicz, M. Cross-sector partnerships for innovation and growth: Can creative industries support traditional sector innovations? Sustainability 2020, 12, 10122. [CrossRef]
dc.relation38. Petticrew, M.; Roberts, H. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide; Blackwell Publishing Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008.
dc.relation39. PRISMA Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Available online: http://www.prisma-statement. org/PRISMAStatement/FlowDiagram (accessed on 28 April 2022).
dc.relation40. Hiebl, M.R.W. Sample selection in systematic literature reviews of management research. Organ. Res. Methods 2021, 1–33. [CrossRef]
dc.relation41. Mamikutty, R.; Aly, A.S.; Marhazlinda, J. Databases selection in a systematic review of the association between anthropometric measurements and dental caries among children in Asia. Children 2021, 8, 565. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
dc.relation42. Gusenbauer, M.; Haddaway, N.R. Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Res. Synth. Methods 2020, 11, 181–217. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
dc.relation43. Pranckute, R. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. ˙ Publications 2021, 9, 12. [CrossRef]
dc.relation44. Burnham, J.F. Scopus Database: A review. Biomed. Dig. Libr. 2006, 3, 1. [CrossRef]
dc.relation45. Booth, A. Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: A structured methodological review. Syst. Rev. 2016, 5, 74. [CrossRef]
dc.relation46. Kraus, S.; Breier, M.; Dasí-Rodríguez, S. The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2020, 16, 1023–1042. [CrossRef]
dc.relation47. Chitu Okoli. A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2015, 37, 879–910. [CrossRef]
dc.relation48. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009, 151, 264–269. [CrossRef]
dc.relation49. Jones, O.; Gatrell, C. Editorial: The future of writing and reviewing for IJMR. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2014, 16, 249–264. [CrossRef]
dc.relation50. Wehn, U.; Gharesifard, M.; Ceccaroni, L.; Joyce, H.; Ajates, R.; Woods, S.; Bilbao, A.; Parkinson, S.; Gold, M.; Wheatland, J. Impact assessment of citizen science: State of the art and guiding principles for a consolidated approach. Sustain. Sci. 2021, 16, 1683–1699. [CrossRef]
dc.relation51. Hawker, S.; Payne, S.; Kerr, C.; Hardey, M.; Powell, J. Appraising the evidence: Reviewing disparate data systematically. Qual. Health Res. 2002, 12, 1284–1299. [CrossRef]
dc.relation52. Lorenc, T.; Petticrew, M.; Whitehead, M.; Renton, A. Crime fear of crime and mental health: Synthesis of theory and systematic reviews of interventions and qualitative evidence. Public Health Res. 2014, 2, 1–398. [CrossRef]
dc.relation53. Braithwaite, J.; Herkes, J.; Ludlow, K.; Testa, L.; Lamprell, G. Association between organisational and workplace cultures, and patient outcomes: Systematic review. BMJ Open 2017, 7, 1–11. [CrossRef]
dc.relation54. Armstrong, D.; Stratford, E. Partnerships for local sustainability and local governance in a Tasmanian settlement. Local Environ. 2004, 9, 541–560. [CrossRef]
dc.relation55. Battaglia, M.; Annesi, N.; Pierantoni, I.; Sargolini, M. Future perspectives of sustainable development: An innovative planning approach to inner areas. Experience of an Italian alpine region. Futures 2019, 114, 1–15. [CrossRef]
dc.relation56. Blake, J. Sustainable communities and social work practice learning: Reflections on emergent, learning partnerships. J. Pract. Teach. Learn. 2009, 9, 93–114. [CrossRef]
dc.relation57. Borgström, S. Balancing diversity and connectivity in multi-level governance settings for urban transformative capacity. Ambio 2019, 48, 463–477. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
dc.relation58. Burmaa, N.; Baasanjav, G. Developing institutional arrangements for sustainable development within mineral rich resource countries: The case of Mongolia. Geomat. Environ. Eng. 2021, 15, 23–39. [CrossRef]
dc.relation59. Cannarella, C.; Piccioni, V. Innovation diffusion and architecture and dynamics of local territorial networks. Trames J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 2008, 12, 215–237. [CrossRef]
dc.relation60. Cottafava, D.; Corazza, L. Co-design of a stakeholders’ ecosystem: An assessment methodology by linking social network analysis, stakeholder theory and participatory mapping. Kybernetes 2021, 50, 836–858. [CrossRef]
dc.relation61. Darlow, A.; Newby, L. Partnerships: Panacea or pitfall? Experience in Leicester environment city. Local Environ. Int. J. Justice Sustain. 1997, 2, 73–81. [CrossRef]
dc.relation62. Devenin, V. Collaborative community development in mining regions: The Calama Plus and Creo Antofagasta programs in Chile. Resour. Policy 2021, 70, 101284. [CrossRef]
dc.relation63. Dzhengiz, T. The relationship of organisational value frames with the configuration of alliance portfolios: Cases from electricity utilities in Great Britain. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4455. [CrossRef]
dc.relation64. Gebre-Egziabher, A. Sustainable cities programme: A joint UN-HABITAT-UNEP facility on the urban environment with participation of the Dutch government. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2004, 1023, 2–79. [CrossRef]
dc.relation65. Hafteck, P. An introduction to decentralized cooperation: Definitions, origins and conceptual mapping. Public Administration and Development. Int. J. Manag. Res. Pract. 2003, 23, 333–345. [CrossRef]
dc.relation66. Hands, V.; Anderson, R. Local sustainability indicators and their role in the implementation of the sustainable development goals in the HE sector. In Handbook of Sustainability Science and Research; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 267–283.
dc.relation67. Hawkins, C.V.; Wang, X. Sustainable development governance: Citizen participation and support networks in local sustainability initiatives. Public Work. Manag. Policy 2012, 17, 7–29. [CrossRef]
dc.relation68. Hawkins, C.V.; Krause, R.; Feiock, R.C.; Curley, C. The administration and management of environmental sustainability initiatives: A collaborative perspective. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2018, 61, 2015–2031. [CrossRef]
dc.relation69. Ioppolo, G.; Cucurachi, S.; Salomone, R.; Saija, G.; Shi, L. Sustainable local development and environmental governance: A strategic planning experience. Sustainability 2016, 8, 180. [CrossRef]
dc.relation70. Kusakabe, E. Advancing sustainable development at the local level: The case of machizukuri in Japanese cities. Prog. Plan. 2013, 80, 1–65. [CrossRef]
dc.relation71. Leal Filho, W.; Vargas, V.R.; Salvia, A.L.; Brandli, L.L.; Pallant, E.; Klavins, M.; Ray, S.; Moggi, S.; Maruna, M.; Conticelli, E.; et al. The role of higher education institutions in sustainability initiatives at the local level. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 233, 1004–1015. [CrossRef]
dc.relation72. Liao, L.; Warner, M.E.; Homsy, G.C. Sustainability’s forgotten third E: What influences local government actions on social equity? Local Environ. Int. J. Justice Sustain. 2019, 24, 1197–1208. [CrossRef]
dc.relation73. Meessen, H.; Švajda, J.; Kohler, T.; Fabriciusová, V.; Galvánek, D.; Bural’, M.; Káˇcerová, M.; Kadleˇcík, J.; Kadleˇcík, J. Protected areas in the Slovak Carpathians as a contested resource between metropolitan and mountain stakeholders. On the road to local participation. J. Alp. Res. 2015, 103, 1–19. [CrossRef]
dc.relation74. Mosier, S. Does the gown help the town? Examining town–gown relationship influence on local environmental sustainability in the United States. Int. J. Public Admin. 2015, 38, 769–781. [CrossRef]
dc.relation75. Nevens, F.; Frantzeskaki, N.; Gorissen, L.; Loorbach, D. Urban transition labs: Co-creating transformative action for sustainable cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 50, 111–122. [CrossRef]
dc.relation76. Peng, L.P. Effects of anti-dam campaigns on institutional capacity: A case study of Meinung from Taiwan. Paddy Water Environ. 2013, 11, 353–367. [CrossRef]
dc.relation77. Pinch, P.; Reimer, S. Nationalising local sustainability: Lessons from the British wartime utility furniture scheme. Geoforum 2015, 65, 86–95. [CrossRef]
dc.relation78. Quest, J.; Shiel, C.; Watson, S. Transitioning towards a sustainable food city. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2019, 20, 1258–1277. [CrossRef]
dc.relation79. Reeves, A.; Lemon, M.; Cook, D. Jump-starting transition? Catalysing grassroots action on climate change. Energy Eff. 2014, 7, 115–132. [CrossRef]
dc.relation80. Selman, P.; Wragg, A. Local sustainability planning: From interest-driven networks to vision-driven super-networks? Plan. Pr. Res. 1999, 14, 329–340. [CrossRef]
dc.relation81. Sobol, A. Governance barriers to local sustainable development in Poland. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2008, 19, 194–203. [CrossRef]
dc.relation82. Stepankova, R.; Kristianova, K. Top down strategies and bottom up initiatives in Geoparks development in Slovakia. In Proceedings of the 15th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM, Albena, Bulgaria, 18–24 June 2015; Volume 1, pp. 977–984.
dc.relation83. Stojanovic, T.; Barker, N. Improving governance through local coastal partnerships in the UK. Geogr. J. 2008, 174, 344–360. [CrossRef]
dc.relation84. Swann, W.L. Local sustainability innovation through cross-sector collaboration: Lessons from a neighborhood energy competition. J. Public Nonprofit Aff. 2019, 5, 317–337. [CrossRef]
dc.relation85. Törnå, N.; Lidelöw, S.; Stehn, L. A coordination perspective on dialogue processes between planners and developers in a sustainable urban development project. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 588, 052055. [CrossRef]
dc.relation86. Trott, C.D.; Even, T.L.; Frame, S.M. Merging the arts and sciences for collaborative sustainability action: A methodological framework. Sustain. Sci. 2020, 15, 1067–1085. [CrossRef]
dc.relation87. Voisey, H.; Beuermann, C.; Sverdrup, L.A.; O’Riordan, T. The political significance of Local Agenda 21: The early stages of some European experience. Local Environ. Int. J. Justice Sustain. 1996, 1, 33–50. [CrossRef]
dc.relation88. Wallner, H.P.; Narodoslawsky, M. The concept of sustainable islands: Cleaner production, industrial ecology and the network paradigm as preconditions for regional sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod. 1994, 2, 167–171. [CrossRef]
dc.relation89. Zanon, B. Planning small regions in a larger Europe: Spatial planning as a learning process for sustainable local development. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2010, 18, 2049–2072. [CrossRef]
dc.relation90. Barbour, J.B. Micro/meso/macrolevels of analysis. Int. Encycl. Organ. Commun. 2017, 1–15. [CrossRef]
dc.relation91. Lanhoso, F.; Coelho, D.A. Emergence fostered by systemic analysis: Seeding innovation for sustainable development. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 1–12. [CrossRef]
dc.relation92. European Commission. Connecting Universities to Regional Growth: A Practical Guide. 2011. Available online: http://ec.europa. eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/presenta/universities2011/universities2011_en.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2021).
dc.relation93. Zorzini, M.; Hendry, L.C.; Huq, F.A.; Stevenson, M. Socially responsible sourcing: Reviewing the literature and its use of theory. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2015, 35, 60–109. [CrossRef]
dc.relation94. Davies, A. Power, politics and networks: Shaping partnerships for sustainable communities. Area 2002, 34, 190–203. [CrossRef]
dc.relation95. Sagor, R. Guiding School Improvement with Action Research; Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, ASCD: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2000.
dc.relation96. Tang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Wang, K.; Xu, H.; Yi, X. An analysis on the spatial effect of absorptive capacity on regional innovation ability based on empirical research in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3021. [CrossRef]
dc.relation97. Blaikie, P.; Brown, K.; Stocking, M.; Tang, L.; Dixon, P.; Sillitoe, P. Knowledge in action: Local knowledge as a development resource and barriers to its incorporation in natural resource research and development. Agric. Syst. 1997, 55, 217–237. [CrossRef]
dc.relation98. Sun, P.; Li, S.; Zhou, K. Carbon emission and endogenous growth between two economic systems. Front. Energy Res. 2021, 9, 154. [CrossRef]
dc.relation99. Dodds, F.; Schneeberger, K.; Ullah, F. Review of Implementation of Agenda 21 and the Rio Principles; United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs: New York, NY, USA, 2012; Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php? page=view&nr=641&type=400&menu=35 (accessed on 16 April 2021).
dc.relation100. Bettelli, P. What the World Learned Setting Development Goals. 2021. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/ resrep29272.pdf (accessed on 7 April 2021).
dc.relation101. Shulla, K.; Voigt, B.F.; Cibian, S.; Scandone, G.; Martines, E.; Nelkovski, F.; Salehi, P. Effects of COVID-19 on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Discov. Sustain. 2021, 2, 15. [CrossRef]
dc.relation102. Fehling, M.; Nelson, B.D.; Venkatapuram, S. Limitations of the Millennium Development Goals: A literature review. Glob. Public Health 2013, 8, 1109–1122. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
dc.relation103. Sachs, J.D.; McArthur, J.W. The millennium project: A plan for meeting the millennium development goals. Lancet 2005, 365, 347–353. [CrossRef]
dc.relation104. Evanoff, R. Bioregionalism 1.2. Companion to Environmental Studies; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2018; p. 13.
dc.relation105. Zainudin, N.; Lau, J.L.; Munusami, C. Micro-macro measurements of sustainability. In Affordable and Clean Energy, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals; Filho, W.L., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Salvia, A.L., Wall, T., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 1–14. [CrossRef]
dc.relation106. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Evaluation Office. Assessment of Micro-Macro Linkages in Poverty Alleviation: Country Cases. UNDP Evaluation Resource Centre database. 2003. Available online: https://erc.undp.org/evaluation/ evaluations/detail/5316 (accessed on 8 August 2021).
dc.relation107. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Evaluation Office. Assessment of Micro-Macro Linkages in Poverty Alleviation: South Asia; UNDP: New York, NY, USA, 2003.
dc.relation108. Kristensen, H.S.; Mosgaard, M.A. A review of micro level indicators for a circular economy–moving away from the three dimensions of sustainability? J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 243, 118531. [CrossRef]
dc.relation109. Haanpaa, L. Structures and mechanisms in sustainable consumption research. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. Dev. 2007, 6, 53–66. [CrossRef]
dc.relation110. Reid, L.; Sutton, P.; Hunter, C. Theorizing the meso level: The household as a crucible of pro-environmental behaviour. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2010, 34, 309–327. [CrossRef]
dc.relation111. Henao, P.; Alberto, O.; Henao, G.; María, A.; Ramírez, G.; Alexander, R. The quality of education: A reflection from the pedagogical academic management. Cult. Educ. Soc. 2020, 11, 209–218. [CrossRef]
dc.relation112. Abuhasirah, M.; Shahrour, I. Participatory governance comprehensive approach: A proposed model based on practices and experience. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. 2021, 10, 461–465. [CrossRef]
dc.relation113. ImpactRanking. 2021. Available online: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/impactrankings?fbclid=IwAR1tTZIMxsLJYzQAFtu5 tRlxn6Tz2cRisKviFet2oLgJ19lTa_LMv3a8WWE#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/scores_overall/sort_order/asc/cols/undefined (accessed on 10 August 2021).
dc.relation114. Pacheco-Vega, R. NGOs and Sustainable Development. In International Encyclopedia of Civil Society; Anheier, H.K., Toepler, S., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [CrossRef]
dc.relation115. Kuzmani´c, J. Peter Kropotkin and Colin Ward: Two Ideas of Ecological Urbanism. 2020. Available online: https://upcommons. upc.edu/handle/2117/330707 (accessed on 16 September 2021).
dc.relation116. Roth, W.M.; Jornet, A. Toward a theory of experience. Sci. Educ. 2014, 98, 106–126. [CrossRef]
dc.relation117. Abhari, K.; Ostroff, C.; Barcellos, B.; Williams, D. (2021, January) Co-Governance in digital transformation Initiatives: The roles of digital culture and employee experience. In Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Wailea, HI, USA, 5–8 January 2015.
dc.relation118. Plaskoff, J. Employee experience: The new human resource management approach. Strat. HR Rev. 2017, 16, 136–141. [CrossRef]
dc.relation119. Seuring, S.; Yawar, S.A.; Land, A.; Khalid, R.U.; Sauer, P.C. The application of theory in literature reviews–illustrated with examples from supply chain management. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2020, 41, 1–20. [CrossRef]
dc.relation33
dc.relation1
dc.relation11
dc.relation14
dc.rights© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0)
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.sourcehttps://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6601
dc.subjectCross-sectoral cooperation
dc.subjectSustainable local development
dc.subjectMutual aid
dc.subjectEndogenous resources
dc.subjectBioregionalism
dc.subjectCognitive diversity
dc.subjectSeismic shift
dc.subjectBracing capital
dc.titleSustainable local development: consolidated framework for cross-sectoral cooperation via a systematic approach
dc.typeArtículo de revista
dc.typehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.typeText
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.typehttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ART
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.typehttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución