Local institutions of culture as urban stewards: in pursuit of hybrid governance in Warsaw, Poland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 2014, several local entrepreneurs and public institutions of culture have collaborated in transforming a central but neglected place in Warsaw, Poland: Plac Defilad (Parade Square), one of the biggest public squares in Europe.These organizations faced the challenge of taking care of their direct environment, even though they had no legal rights to it, and made efforts to get involved in local management, land-use, and place-making politics by establishing informal cross-sectoral partnership agreements.Between 2017 and 2019 the project was further developed under the conceptual framework of urban environmental stewardship as a participatory action research (PAR) program, facilitated by the author of the paper.The primary goal was to examine whether local institutions of culture could play the roles of urban stewards, and, as such, facilitate the process of creating hybrid governance structures.Only partly successful so far, the project can be seen as a precedent for more inclusive urban environmental governance policies in Warsaw.The findings of the paper highlight an underlying lack of legal vehicles and resources that would allow public institutions to form a coalition and become permanently involved in public space planning issues (that is, a contribution to stewardship practices).Furthermore, the paper argues for the need to consider the "concrete" public square an environmental issue, and for the usefulness of the conceptual framework of urban environmental stewardship for developing further research on hybrid governance initiatives in Poland (a contribution to stewardship theory).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".