The impact of participatory decision-making on legitimacy in planning

Gert Jan Dral, P. Witte, T. Hartmann
{"title":"The impact of participatory decision-making on legitimacy in planning","authors":"Gert Jan Dral, P. Witte, T. Hartmann","doi":"10.1080/02513625.2023.2229633","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Participative decision-making can offer a route toward more democratic and legitimate decisions in spatial planning processes. Although more legitimacy is sometimes presented as a result of participative decision-making, this relationship is more complex and not necessarily causal. This paper explores the relationship between the forms of legitimacy and participation by utilising the input, throughput, and output conceptualisation. In our three cases, we find that participative methods impact legitimacy differently. Participation relates to either throughput or output legitimacy depending on the objective of the participative method and process. For instance, participation allows stakeholders to voice opinions and gain insight into which stakes are balanced in spatial projects. These are typical examples of throughput legitimacy. Furthermore, in our analysis, we draw four conclusions. First, that participation often is a means to another end. For instance, it may be used to build support or attract investment in spatial projects. Second, municipalities switch between forms of legitimacy in their decision- making during participation processes. Third, timing and the long time span of projects have a major impact on participation. And finally, the municipality needs to balance multiple agendas. When this complex social, political and spatial context is not included in the equation of municipal participation, it can obstruct participation processes and delegitimise planning decisions.","PeriodicalId":379677,"journal":{"name":"disP - The Planning Review","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"disP - The Planning Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2023.2229633","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Participative decision-making can offer a route toward more democratic and legitimate decisions in spatial planning processes. Although more legitimacy is sometimes presented as a result of participative decision-making, this relationship is more complex and not necessarily causal. This paper explores the relationship between the forms of legitimacy and participation by utilising the input, throughput, and output conceptualisation. In our three cases, we find that participative methods impact legitimacy differently. Participation relates to either throughput or output legitimacy depending on the objective of the participative method and process. For instance, participation allows stakeholders to voice opinions and gain insight into which stakes are balanced in spatial projects. These are typical examples of throughput legitimacy. Furthermore, in our analysis, we draw four conclusions. First, that participation often is a means to another end. For instance, it may be used to build support or attract investment in spatial projects. Second, municipalities switch between forms of legitimacy in their decision- making during participation processes. Third, timing and the long time span of projects have a major impact on participation. And finally, the municipality needs to balance multiple agendas. When this complex social, political and spatial context is not included in the equation of municipal participation, it can obstruct participation processes and delegitimise planning decisions.
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
参与式决策对规划合法性的影响
参与式决策可以为空间规划过程中更加民主和合法的决策提供一条途径。虽然参与性决策有时会带来更多的合法性,但这种关系更为复杂,也不一定是因果关系。本文通过运用投入、产出和产出概念来探讨合法性形式与参与之间的关系。在我们的三个案例中,我们发现参与式方法对合法性的影响是不同的。根据参与方法和过程的目标,参与与吞吐量或输出合法性有关。例如,参与允许利益相关者发表意见,并深入了解空间项目中哪些利益是平衡的。这些是吞吐量合法性的典型示例。此外,在我们的分析中,我们得出了四个结论。首先,参与往往是达到另一个目的的手段。例如,它可用于为空间项目提供支持或吸引投资。其次,在参与过程中,市政当局在其决策的合法性形式之间转换。第三,项目的时间和时间跨度对参与有重大影响。最后,市政当局需要平衡多个议程。当这种复杂的社会、政治和空间背景不包括在市政参与的等式中时,它可能会阻碍参与过程并使规划决策失去合法性。
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
Karl Ganser. Integratives Planen und Handeln Leadership – collectively oriented: Insights from trajectories of temporary urbanism Die Bereitstellung von leistbarem Wohnraum in Zeiten der Wohnkrise Breaking out of the box – towards functional spatial planning Bucharest – the role of spatial planning in a challenging urban environment
×
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