Chapter 15: The Texture of Participation in Community Planning

Question 1

Six-sided triangle:

Answer 1

6 interdependent links of communication between public, planners and politicians in community planning. The potential of dialogue with each interest must be available

Question 2

Politician’s job:

Answer 2

• represent the varied interests of the community (broker-mediator)
• incorporate the interests of developers into deliberations
• provide leadership in community development

Question 3

Planner’s job:

Answer 3

• present all relevant information and analyses to the politician
• making recommendations
• prepare a plan for development which integrates a multitude of public/private interests

Question 4

Paradoxical relationship:

Answer 4

• -> Employer (politician) & employee (planner)

- -> Expert (planner) & client (politician)

Question 5

Planner’s ethical dilemma:

Answer 5

1) position in support of politician –> citizens lost confidence in his/her impartiality
2) position in support of citizens: politician may see this as employee at odds with employer

Question 6

Politicians and public:

Answer 6

public meetings permit citizens to be heard, but not necessarily understood or taken into consideration (NOT A DIALOGUE)

Question 7

Planners and public:

Answer 7

Public often feels ignored/talked down to by planners; processes only assign citizens right to be CONSULTED

Question 8

Relationship between citizens, politicians and planners is essential to planning because:

Answer 8

1) Public is a primary source of info about the problems being experienced in a community, the impacts of proposed solutions and the values held by the community
2) Planners and politicians know the resources available to solve problems, limits of knowledge about impacts and procedural avenues to be followed; they also implement plans.

Question 9

Roles of the planner:

Answer 9

• Planning Agency Leader (develop relationships)
• Technical Advisor (skills)
• Political Innovator (improve chances of acceptance with influentials)
• Citizen Educator (aware of attitudes + how to enlarge acceptance)
• Social reformer, advocate, social inventor

Question 10

Contrived Participation:

Answer 10

1) Manipulation: persuade citizens to support already decided-upon programs
2) Therapy: cure citizens of concerns through diversionary activities (workshops, media)

Question 11

Token Participation:

Answer 11

3) Informing: info supplied about nature & schedule of planning task & role of citizens (may be 1-way communication)
4) Consultation: attitude surveys, public meeting, but no guarantee of being understood or responded to
5) Placation: citizens have a chance to be heard on ACs or websites, but their input may not be used

Question 12

Citizen Power-Sharing:

Answer 12

6) Partnership: sharing of responsibilities through joint policy boards/committees; influencing outcome through votes
7) Delegated Power: gives dominant decision making responsibility through planning board or commission
8) Citizen Control: citizens govern program/project in all policy and managerial aspects (e.g. coops)

Question 13

Broadening participation:

Answer 13

entails increasing breadth by acknowledging the differences in citizenry and giving voices to underrepresented groups

Question 14

Including women:

Answer 14

dealing with aspatial concerns + time of day + need for child-care

Question 15

Including youth:

Answer 15

involving community centres and schools in planning

Question 16

Including the elderly:

Answer 16

daylight hours. easy access (or provide transportation), good acoustics

Question 17

Including persons with disabilities:

Answer 17

access to those with hearing loss, visual impairments, physical disabilities, etc.

Question 18

Including ethnic populations:

Answer 18

translating materials into languages understood by community, augmenting staff that understands ethnic concerns

Question 19

Consensus-building approach:

Answer 19

communicative planning approach characterized by more democratic processes to achieve mutually beneficial agreement among different interests in a community. It represents a shift towards a more pluralist and inclusive approach to community planning

e.g. Circle Process

Question 20

Two features of consensus-building:

Answer 20

1) works horizontally: using consensus with discussion not votes
2) array of participants: the more and more diverse, the higher the chance of success

Question 21

Why NIMBY?

Answer 21

Desire to alert planners and politicians to local concerns and values and bring local knowledge into the process.

Question 22

Responses to NIMBY:

Answer 22

1) Proposal improvement
2) Compensation for externalities
3) Increased communication and consensus-building

Question 23

Development process:

Answer 23

1) Land Acquisition
2) Site Preparation
3) Project Production
4) Project Marketing

Approval for applications involves complex negotiation-bargaining situations with planners; various trade-offs made (e.g. 15% units: low-income housing)

Question 24

Developers and Planners Relationship:

Answer 24

“Symbiotic interrelationship”:

1) planners prepare plans intended to build upon (what developers do)
2) developers make decisions based on knowledge of what planners will accept

Question 25

Effective participation requires:

Answer 25

the blending of a myriad of values of participants and integrating their numerous roles in an extensive community dialogue

Question 26

Who are the key participants in community planning and why?

Answer 26

The key participants in community planning are citizens (the public), planners and politicians.

Citizens are a primary source of information about the problems being experienced in a community, the impacts of proposed solutions and the values held by the community whereas politicians and planners know the resources that are available to solve problems, the limits of knowledge about impacts, and the institutional/legislated procedural avenues that must be observed and followed. Evidently, the latter are also the ones involved in final plan implementation.

Question 27

In what ways does citizen participation affect the outcome of a community’s plan?

Answer 27

Citizen participation ensures (or seeks to ensure) that the values held by the community are adequately represented in it’s community final plan. Overall, citizen participation allows for increased dialogue between the public and politicians & planners in an aim to achieve a more agreed upon, inclusive and democratic consensus among all key participants in community planning.

Question 28

How can we continue to expand participation in planning, and what modifications might be needed to the roles of various participants?

Answer 28

Expanding participation in planning will especially require increasing breadth in participation. In order to do so, efforts must be made to facilitate and ensure the involvement of women, youth, the elderly, persons with disabilities and ethnic communities in community planning.

Such efforts may include holding meetings at times of the day that are convenient to women, involving schools and community centres in planning, providing transportation for the elderly to attend meetings, ensuring access for those with disabilities, translating information into languages understood by an ethnic community, etc.

Planners need to take on the role of “advocate” in order to facilitate participation in planning for said groups, focusing on the specific needs of each group and even differences within groups, instead of looking at communities as being homogenous.

Question 29

Which forms of public participation engage citizens most deeply?

Answer 29

The 3 forms of participation that engage citizens most deeply are grouped into Arnstein’s category of “citizen power-sharing”.
Partnership involves an agreement to share responsibilities for planning through joint policy boards or committees.

Delegated Power gives citizens dominant decision-making responsibility over a plan or program, usually from the outset.

Citizen Control allows citizens to govern a program or project in all its policy and managerial aspects (especially coops)