@article{Martens2011, author = {Martens, D{\"o}rte}, title = {Well-being and acceptance - contradictory aims in forest management?}, series = {Eco.mont : journal on protected mountain areas research}, volume = {3}, journal = {Eco.mont : journal on protected mountain areas research}, number = {2}, publisher = {Austrian Academy of Sciences Press}, address = {Wien}, issn = {2073-106X}, pages = {63 -- 65}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Urban forests fulfil various functions, among them the restoration process and aesthetical needs of urban residents. This article reflects the attitudes towards different managed forests on the one hand and their influence on psychological well-being on the other. Results of empirical approaches from both fields show some inconsistency, suggesting that people have a more positive attitude towards wild forest areas, while the effect on well-being is more positive after a walk in tended forest areas. A discussion follows on the link between perception and the effect of urban forests. An outlook on necessary research reveals the need for longitudinal research. The article concludes by showing management implications.}, language = {en} } @techreport{OPUS4-5497, title = {Was machen Verwaltungsmanager wirklich? : Explorative Ergebnisse eines Lehrforschungsprojekts}, editor = {Kroll, Alexander and Siegel, John Philipp}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-54526}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Dieses Sonderheft der Schriftenreihe des Lehrstuhls f{\"u}r Public Management pr{\"a}sentiert ausgew{\"a}hlte Ergebnisse eines Lehrforschungsprojektes. Dabei wurde in Anlehnung an Mintzbergs Managementforschung die Frage gestellt, wie F{\"u}hrungskr{\"a}fte in der Verwaltung tats{\"a}chlich ihre Organisationen steuern. Das Sonderheft enth{\"a}lt die explorativen Befunde aus drei empirischen Studien, die von Teilnehmern und Teilnehmerinnen des Seminars durchgef{\"u}hrt wurden.}, language = {de} } @article{JashariTiberiusDabić2021, author = {Jashari, Arbrie and Tiberius, Victor and Dabić, Marina}, title = {Tracing the progress of scenario research in business and management}, series = {Futures \& foresight science}, volume = {4}, journal = {Futures \& foresight science}, number = {2}, publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons}, address = {Hoboken, NJ}, issn = {2573-5152}, doi = {10.1002/ffo2.109}, pages = {9}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Business and management research on scenarios has been highly productive over the decades but led to a complex literature that is hard to oversee. To organize the field and identify distinguishable research clusters, we conducted a co-citation analysis focusing on the long-term history of research. We compare our findings with a previously published bibliographic coupling, focusing on the more recent research to trace its development over time. Our study revealed six research clusters: (1) Planning the Future with Scenarios, (2) Scenario Planning in Strategic Management, (3) Reinforcing the Scenario Technique, (4) Integration of Scenario Planning and MCDA, (5) Combination of Different Methods, and (6) Decision-making through Stochastic Programming, whereas the bibliographic coupling generated 11 clusters. Some former research clusters were divided into separate new clusters, while others were united. Additionally, completely new clusters emerged. Future research on scenarios is expected (1) to further differentiate into strategy and operations, (2) to be based on "behavioral futures" or "behavioral foresight" as a new research stream, (3) to advance the scenario technique methodically and include new specific scenario generation methods, and (4) to put forth new application areas.}, language = {en} } @article{ReinhardGeisslerBlaum2019, author = {Reinhard, Johanna E. and Geissler, Katja and Blaum, Niels}, title = {Short-term responses of darkling beetles (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae) to the effects of fire and grazing in savannah rangeland}, series = {Insect Conservation and Diversity}, volume = {12}, journal = {Insect Conservation and Diversity}, number = {1}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {1752-458X}, doi = {10.1111/icad.12324}, pages = {39 -- 48}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Fire and grazing shape biodiversity in savannah landscapes. In land use management, knowing the effects of fire and grazing on biodiversity are important in order to ensure environmental sustainability. Beetles specifically are indicators of the biodiversity response to fire and grazing. A grazing exclusion and burning experiment in a split-plot design was used in order to investigate the interacting effects of fire and wildlife grazing on biomass, diversity, and species composition of darkling beetles (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) over time after fire. Darkling beetle species richness and diversity were responding in a three-way-interaction to fire, grazing, and time after fire, whereby biomass of darkling beetles remained unaffected and species compositional changes were attributed to seasonal changes of time only. Fire on ungrazed plots had a negative effect on species diversity and richness 2 weeks and 6 months post fire, whereas fire on grazed plots had no impact on species diversity and richness. Grazing only lowered species diversity and richness 6 months after fire treatments. Results suggest that grazing overrides the effects of fire and that the similar effects caused by fire and grazing are due to niche and assemblage simplification of the habitat.}, language = {en} } @misc{WeiseAugeBaessleretal.2020, author = {Weise, Hanna and Auge, Harald and Baessler, Cornelia and B{\"a}rlund, Ilona and Bennett, Elena M. and Berger, Uta and Bohn, Friedrich and Bonn, Aletta and Borchardt, Dietrich and Brand, Fridolin and Jeltsch, Florian and Joshi, Jasmin Radha and Grimm, Volker}, title = {Resilience trinity}, series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {4}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-51528}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-515284}, pages = {14}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.}, language = {en} } @article{WeiseAugeBaessleretal.2020, author = {Weise, Hanna and Auge, Harald and Baessler, Cornelia and B{\"a}rlund, Ilona and Bennett, Elena M. and Berger, Uta and Bohn, Friedrich and Bonn, Aletta and Borchardt, Dietrich and Brand, Fridolin and Jeltsch, Florian and Joshi, Jasmin Radha and Grimm, Volker}, title = {Resilience trinity}, series = {Oikos}, volume = {129}, journal = {Oikos}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0030-1299}, doi = {10.1111/oik.07213}, pages = {445 -- 456}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.}, language = {en} } @misc{TiberiusRietzBouncken2020, author = {Tiberius, Victor and Rietz, Meike and Bouncken, Ricarda B.}, title = {Performance analysis and science mapping of institutional entrepreneurship research}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {3}, issn = {1867-5808}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-52509}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-525092}, pages = {23}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Institutional entrepreneurship comprises the activities of agents who disrupt existing social institutions or create new ones, often to enable diffusion, especially of radical innovations, in a market. The increased interest in institutional entrepreneurship has produced a large number of scholarly publications, especially in the last five years. As a consequence, the literature landscape is somewhat complex and scattered. We aim to compile a quantitative overview of the field within business and management research by conducting bibliometric performance analyses and science mappings. We identified the most productive and influential journals, authors, and articles with the highest impact. We found that institutional entrepreneurship has stronger ties to organization studies than to entrepreneurship research. Additionally, a large body of literature at the intersection of institutions and entrepreneurship does not refer to institutional entrepreneurship theory. The science mappings revealed a distinction between theoretical and conceptual research on one hand and applied and empirical research on the other hand. Research clusters reflect the structure-agency problem by focusing on the change agent's goals and interests, strategies, and specific implementation mechanisms, as well as the relevance of public agents for existing institutions, and a more abstract process rather than agency view.}, language = {en} } @article{TiberiusRietzBouncken2020, author = {Tiberius, Victor and Rietz, Meike and Bouncken, Ricarda B.}, title = {Performance analysis and science mapping of institutional entrepreneurship research}, series = {Administrative Sciences}, volume = {10}, journal = {Administrative Sciences}, number = {3}, publisher = {MDPI}, address = {Basel}, doi = {10.3390/admsci10030069}, pages = {21}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Institutional entrepreneurship comprises the activities of agents who disrupt existing social institutions or create new ones, often to enable diffusion, especially of radical innovations, in a market. The increased interest in institutional entrepreneurship has produced a large number of scholarly publications, especially in the last five years. As a consequence, the literature landscape is somewhat complex and scattered. We aim to compile a quantitative overview of the field within business and management research by conducting bibliometric performance analyses and science mappings. We identified the most productive and influential journals, authors, and articles with the highest impact. We found that institutional entrepreneurship has stronger ties to organization studies than to entrepreneurship research. Additionally, a large body of literature at the intersection of institutions and entrepreneurship does not refer to institutional entrepreneurship theory. The science mappings revealed a distinction between theoretical and conceptual research on one hand and applied and empirical research on the other hand. Research clusters reflect the structure-agency problem by focusing on the change agent's goals and interests, strategies, and specific implementation mechanisms, as well as the relevance of public agents for existing institutions, and a more abstract process rather than agency view.}, language = {en} } @article{DiekmannAndresBeckeretal.2019, author = {Diekmann, Martin and Andres, Christian and Becker, Thomas and Bennie, Jonathan and Blueml, Volker and Bullock, James M. and Culmsee, Heike and Fanigliulo, Miriam and Hahn, Annett and Heinken, Thilo and Leuschner, Christoph and Luka, Stefanie and Meissner, Justus and M{\"u}ller, Josef and Newton, Adrian and Peppler-Lisbach, Cord and Rosenthal, Gert and van den Berg, Leon J. L. and Vergeer, Philippine and Wesche, Karsten}, title = {Patterns of long-term vegetation change vary between different types of semi-natural grasslands in Western and Central Europe}, series = {Journal of vegetation science}, volume = {30}, journal = {Journal of vegetation science}, number = {2}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {1100-9233}, doi = {10.1111/jvs.12727}, pages = {187 -- 202}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Questions Has plant species richness in semi-natural grasslands changed over recent decades? Do the temporal trends of habitat specialists differ from those of habitat generalists? Has there been a homogenization of the grassland vegetation? Location Different regions in Germany and the UK. Methods We conducted a formal meta-analysis of re-survey vegetation studies of semi-natural grasslands. In total, 23 data sets were compiled, spanning up to 75 years between the surveys, including 13 data sets from wet grasslands, six from dry grasslands and four from other grassland types. Edaphic conditions were assessed using mean Ellenberg indicator values for soil moisture, nitrogen and pH. Changes in species richness and environmental variables were evaluated using response ratios. Results In most wet grasslands, total species richness declined over time, while habitat specialists almost completely vanished. The number of species losses increased with increasing time between the surveys and were associated with a strong decrease in soil moisture and higher soil nutrient contents. Wet grasslands in nature reserves showed no such changes or even opposite trends. In dry grasslands and other grassland types, total species richness did not consistently change, but the number or proportions of habitat specialists declined. There were also considerable changes in species composition, especially in wet grasslands that often have been converted into intensively managed, highly productive meadows or pastures. We did not find a general homogenization of the vegetation in any of the grassland types. Conclusions The results document the widespread deterioration of semi-natural grasslands, especially of those types that can easily be transformed to high production grasslands. The main causes for the loss of grassland specialists are changed management in combination with increased fertilization and nitrogen deposition. Dry grasslands are most resistant to change, but also show a long-term trend towards an increase in more mesotrophic species.}, language = {en} } @book{SchmiedgenRhinowKoeppenetal.2015, author = {Schmiedgen, Jan and Rhinow, Holger and K{\"o}ppen, Eva and Meinel, Christoph}, title = {Parts without a whole?}, number = {97}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-334-3}, issn = {1613-5652}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-79969}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {143}, year = {2015}, abstract = {This explorative study gives a descriptive overview of what organizations do and experience when they say they practice design thinking. It looks at how the concept has been appropriated in organizations and also describes patterns of design thinking adoption. The authors use a mixed-method research design fed by two sources: questionnaire data and semi-structured personal expert interviews. The study proceeds in six parts: (1) design thinking¹s entry points into organizations; (2) understandings of the descriptor; (3) its fields of application and organizational localization; (4) its perceived impact; (5) reasons for its discontinuation or failure; and (6) attempts to measure its success. In conclusion the report challenges managers to be more conscious of their current design thinking practice. The authors suggest a co-evolution of the concept¹s introduction with innovation capability building and the respective changes in leadership approaches. It is argued that this might help in unfolding design thinking¹s hidden potentials as well as preventing unintended side-effects such as discontented teams or the dwindling authority of managers.}, language = {en} }