The Democratic Legitimacy of Urban Planning Procedures: Public Private Partnerships in Turin and Zurich

Maarit F. Stroebele
{"title":"The Democratic Legitimacy of Urban Planning Procedures: Public Private Partnerships in Turin and Zurich","authors":"Maarit F. Stroebele","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1551867","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many European cities are faced with the task of transforming former industrial zones into new residential and commercial neighbourhoods. Such urban planning processes frequently include both public and private sector actors in decision making. Furthermore, they often give way to controversial public debates about the design and uses of the urban environment as well as the planning procedures. My paper examines democratic legitimacy of decision making in urban planning processes since the 1990s. Its aim is to contribute to the research on governance and democracy at the municipal level. The study consists of a qualitative comparison of two recent conversions of former industrial sites into new urban neighbourhoods in Zurich (Switzerland) and Turin (Italy). The theoretical approaches used in the study derive from fields of urban governance (e.g. Rhodes 1996, Stoker 1998) and democratic legitimisation of decision processes (Scharpf 1999, Sorensen and Torfing 2005, Skelcher 1998). The two cases of so-called public private partnerships show similarities in the decision making processes, notwithstanding different institutional contexts. The phases of planning and construction included citizen participation and deliberative instruments. However, neither the democratic legitimacy of the decision making processes nor of the actors involved was always assured. Consequently, non-classical means of civic political participation (petitions, lobbying) were applied to influence planning decisions, especially where no institutional means for citizen involvement in urban planning such as local referendums were possible. The paper shows that the increase in civic participation and the problems with democratic legitimacy in governance processes are not only typical of this rather common problem in urban policy making; the two phenomena are connected to a more general change in many fields of local policy making which involves the participation of private companies as well as citizens.","PeriodicalId":321047,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Leadership and Sustainability (Topic)","volume":"78 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Leadership and Sustainability (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1551867","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Many European cities are faced with the task of transforming former industrial zones into new residential and commercial neighbourhoods. Such urban planning processes frequently include both public and private sector actors in decision making. Furthermore, they often give way to controversial public debates about the design and uses of the urban environment as well as the planning procedures. My paper examines democratic legitimacy of decision making in urban planning processes since the 1990s. Its aim is to contribute to the research on governance and democracy at the municipal level. The study consists of a qualitative comparison of two recent conversions of former industrial sites into new urban neighbourhoods in Zurich (Switzerland) and Turin (Italy). The theoretical approaches used in the study derive from fields of urban governance (e.g. Rhodes 1996, Stoker 1998) and democratic legitimisation of decision processes (Scharpf 1999, Sorensen and Torfing 2005, Skelcher 1998). The two cases of so-called public private partnerships show similarities in the decision making processes, notwithstanding different institutional contexts. The phases of planning and construction included citizen participation and deliberative instruments. However, neither the democratic legitimacy of the decision making processes nor of the actors involved was always assured. Consequently, non-classical means of civic political participation (petitions, lobbying) were applied to influence planning decisions, especially where no institutional means for citizen involvement in urban planning such as local referendums were possible. The paper shows that the increase in civic participation and the problems with democratic legitimacy in governance processes are not only typical of this rather common problem in urban policy making; the two phenomena are connected to a more general change in many fields of local policy making which involves the participation of private companies as well as citizens.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
城市规划程序的民主合法性:都灵和苏黎世的公私伙伴关系
许多欧洲城市都面临着将以前的工业区改造成新的住宅区和商业区的任务。这种城市规划过程往往包括公共和私营部门行动者参与决策。此外,它们经常让位于关于城市环境的设计和使用以及规划程序的有争议的公众辩论。我的论文考察了自20世纪90年代以来城市规划过程中决策的民主合法性。其目的是促进对市政一级的治理和民主的研究。这项研究包括对苏黎世(瑞士)和都灵(意大利)最近两次将以前的工业场所转变为新的城市街区的定性比较。研究中使用的理论方法来源于城市治理领域(如Rhodes 1996, Stoker 1998)和决策过程的民主合法化(Scharpf 1999, Sorensen and Torfing 2005, Skelcher 1998)。这两个所谓公私伙伴关系的案例在决策过程中显示出相似之处,尽管体制背景不同。规划和建设阶段包括公民参与和审议工具。然而,无论是决策过程的民主合法性,还是有关行动者的民主合法性,都始终得不到保证。因此,非传统的公民政治参与手段(请愿、游说)被用于影响规划决策,特别是在没有公民参与城市规划的体制手段(如地方公民投票)的情况下。本文表明,公民参与的增加和治理过程中的民主合法性问题不仅是城市决策中这一相当普遍的问题的典型;这两种现象与地方决策许多领域的更普遍变化有关,这种变化涉及私营公司和公民的参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Business Excellence Through the Theory of Accountability CEO Private Firm Experience and Idiosyncratic Risk Effect CEO’s Demographics, and Entrepreneur and Management Skills on Business Philanthropic Activities and Its Subsequent Social and Business Benefits Leader’s Social Relationship and the Policy of Dividend Distribution: Study of Tunisian Non-Financial Listed Companies. The Confined Intention: The Reverse Gender Gap in Corporate Environmental Governance in China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1