Cultural, ideological and social sources of anarchy in spatial management in Poland. The article is an individual statement about the state of the steering sphere of spatial management in Poland. The author puts forward the thesis that for years there has been anarchy in it, which deepened in the period of systemic transformation. Despite the established legal framework of spatial management, consistent with European standards and the existence of spatial planning institutions at local, regional and national level, manifestations of anarchy are widely visible. This is an important, though not the only, reason for the widely observed and repeatedly documented disorder and even spatial chaos in the material sphere of spatial management in Poland. The sources of this anarchy are sought in a specific Polish culture, ideologies professed by professionals related to spatial management, and in old and new social divisions.
The paradox of enterprise management is the company must continually change in a dynamic and difficult-to-predict environment in order to achieve business continuity and profitability goals. The relatively low efficiency and awareness of the need for change at network organizations means the problems connecting with changes implementation, identification of conditions limiting their realizations and importance of final results are still significant. This article described this issue by the diagnosis of current state of the change management in various types of network organizations and showing how this state can be improved in the future. Assuming the organization will strive for conscious and organized change management.
Though current conservation policy in Poland refl ects world trends and approaches to action, compliance with all of its assumptions would entail the Polish authorities remodelling both the system and the methods by which natural resources are managed. On the one hand this requires a change of approach to the management of natural resources from the traditional, purely nature-related one, to a more modern inter-disciplinary one that takes in social and economic conditioning. On the other hand, a system need to be put in place to allow these ideas to be introduced in practice. The work described here deals with the participation of different stakeholder groups in nature management, with this regarded as a method of increasing the latter’s effi ciency. The many examples (of good practice) presented by the author well illustrate the wisdom of the approach, which often seems to achieve success where it is attempted.