@article{BalsReichard2000,
  author    = {Bals, Hansj{\"u}rgen and Reichard, Christoph},
  title     = {Das neue kommunale Haushalts- und Rechnungswesen},
  isbn      = {3-409-11580-3},
  year      = {2000},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{Bals2011,
  author    = {Bals, Hansj{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Neue Haushaltssteuerung},
  isbn      = {978-3-531- 17546-1},
  year      = {2011},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{BalderjahnPeyerSeegebarthetal.2018,
  author    = {Balderjahn, Ingo and Peyer, Mathias and Seegebarth, Barbara and Wiedmann, Klaus-Peter and Weber, Anja},
  title     = {The many faces of sustainability-conscious consumers},
  series = {Journal of Business Research},
  volume    = {91},
  journal   = {Journal of Business Research},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0148-2963},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.022},
  pages     = {83 -- 93},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Responding to the global call for a "sustainable economy" requires meaningful insights into sustainability-conscious consumers and their actual buying behaviors. Sustainable consumption is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon because it encompasses several distinct behavioral patterns and consumption types. Therefore, companies are well advised to recognize multiple types of sustainability-conscious consumers with different expectations, attitudes, and values and to implement targeting strategies that do not rest on the assumption of homogeneity. Thus, the objective of this study is to provide a more fine-grained picture of (un)sustainable consumer segments and their differentiated effects in different product markets. Based on three large datasets, we create a robust six-segment typology of consumer consciousness regarding sustainable consumption. By using panel data on actual purchases, the results show not only that sustainability concerns significantly positively influence actual sustainable purchases, as expected, but also that sustainable buying can occur independently of sustainability concerns.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BachJantzVeit2011,
  author    = {Bach, Tobias and Jantz, Bastian and Veit, Sylvia},
  title     = {Verwaltungspolitik als Politikfeld},
  isbn      = {978-3-531- 17546-1},
  year      = {2011},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{Bach2007,
  author    = {Bach, Tobias},
  title     = {Agencies in Norwegen : Steuerung und Organisation zentralstaatlicher Beh{\"o}rden},
  isbn      = {978-3- 531-15422-0},
  year      = {2007},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{AulenbacherJacobsenVoelker2007,
  author    = {Aulenbacher, Brigitte and Jacobsen, Heike and V{\"o}lker, Susanne},
  title     = {Forschung im Dialog - Einleitung},
  isbn      = {978-3-531-15139-7},
  year      = {2007},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{ApeltSenge2015,
  author    = {Apelt, Maja and Senge, Konstanze},
  title     = {Organisation und Unsicherheit},
  series = {Organisation und Unsicherheit},
  journal   = {Organisation und Unsicherheit},
  editor    = {Apelt, Maja},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Wiesbaden},
  pages     = {1 -- 13},
  year      = {2015},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{ApeltBesioCorsietal.2017,
  author    = {Apelt, Maja and Besio, Cristina and Corsi, Giancarlo and von Groddeck, Victoria and Grothe-Hammer, Michael and Tacke, Veronika},
  title     = {Resurrecting organization without renouncing society},
  series = {European management journal},
  volume    = {35},
  journal   = {European management journal},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Elsevier Science},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0263-2373},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.emj.2017.01.002},
  pages     = {8 -- 14},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {In a recent article in this journal, Ahrne, Brunsson, and Seidl (2016) suggest a definition of organization as a 'decided social order' composed of five elements (membership, rules, hierarchies, monitoring, and sanctions) which rest on decisions. 'Partial organization' uses only one or a few of these decidable elements while 'complete organization' uses them all. Such decided orders may also occur outside formal organizations, as the authors observe. Although we appreciate the idea of improving our understanding of organization(s) in modern society, we believe that Ahrne, Brunsson, and Seidl's suggestion jeopardizes the concept of organization by blurring its specific meaning. As the authors already draw on the work of Niklas Luhmann, we propose taking this exploration a step further and the potential of systems theory more seriously. Organizational analysis would then be able to retain a distinctive notion of formal organization on the one hand while benefiting from an encompassing theory of modern society on the other. With this extended conceptual framework, we would expect to gain a deeper understanding of how organizations implement and shape different societal realms as well as mediate between their particular logics, and, not least, how they are related to non-organizational social forms (e.g. families).},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Angerer2018,
  author    = {Angerer, Marie-Luise},
  title     = {Intensive bondage},
  series = {Affect in relation: families, places, technologies},
  journal   = {Affect in relation: families, places, technologies},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  isbn      = {978-1-315-16386-4},
  pages     = {241 -- 258},
  year      = {2018},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Angelow2014,
  author    = {Angelow, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Das System von 1914 : Funktionen und Spielr{\"a}ume},
  year      = {2014},
  language  = {de}
}