Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?

被引:25
|
作者
Astrom, Joachim [1 ]
机构
[1] Orebro Univ, Sch Humanities Educ & Social Sci, S-70182 Orebro, Sweden
来源
URBAN PLANNING | 2020年 / 5卷 / 02期
关键词
citizen participation; e-participation; new urban agenda; planning practice; smart cities; trust in planning; urban planners; PUBLIC-PARTICIPATION; ADMINISTRATORS;
D O I
10.17645/up.v5i2.3021
中图分类号
TU98 [区域规划、城乡规划];
学科分类号
0814 ; 082803 ; 0833 ;
摘要
Based on the critical stance of citizens towards urban planning, growing attention has been directed towards new forms of citizen participation. A key expectation is that advanced digital technologies will reconnect citizens and decision makers and enhance trust in planning. However, empirical evidence suggests participation by itself does not foster trust, and many scholars refer to a general weakness of these initiatives to deliver the expected outcomes. Considering that trust is reciprocal, this article will switch focus and concentrate on planners' attitudes towards citizens. Do urban planners generally think that citizens are trustworthy? Even though studies show that public officials are more trusting than people in general, it is possible that they do not trust citizens when interacting with government. However, empirical evidence is scarce. While there is plenty of research on citizens' trust in government, public officials trust in citizens has received little scholarly attention. To address this gap, we will draw on a survey targeted to a representative sample of public managers in Swedish local government (N = 1430). First, urban planners will be compared with other public officials when it comes to their level of trust toward citizens' ability, integrity and benevolence. In order to understand variations in trust, a set of institutional factors will thereafter be tested, along with more commonly used individual factors. In light of the empirical findings, the final section of the article returns to the idea of e-participation as a trust-building strategy. What would make planners trust the citizens in participatory urban planning?
引用
收藏
页码:84 / 93
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] INVESTIGATING GEOSPARQL REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATORY URBAN PLANNING
    Mohammadi, E.
    Hunter, A. J. S.
    WebMGS 2015, 2015, 44 (W7): : 11 - 15
  • [42] The Urban Mentoring as A New Method of Participatory Urban Planning in Poland
    Martyniuk-Peczek, Justyna
    Rembarz, Gabriela
    WORLD MULTIDISCIPLINARY CIVIL ENGINEERING-ARCHITECTURE-URBAN PLANNING SYMPOSIUM 2016, WMCAUS 2016, 2016, 161 : 1647 - 1655
  • [43] Effectiveness of Virtual Reality in Participatory Urban Planning
    van Leeuwen, Jos P.
    Hermans, Klaske
    Jylha, Antti
    Quanjer, Arnold Jan
    Nijman, Hanke
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 4TH MEDIA ARCHITECTURE BIENNALE CONFERENCE 2018 (MAB18), 2018, : 128 - 136
  • [44] Diffuse Institutional Trust and Specific Institutional Mistrust in Nordic Participatory Planning: Experience from Contested Urban Projects
    Lehtonen, Markku
    De Carlo, Laurence
    PLANNING THEORY & PRACTICE, 2019, 20 (02) : 203 - 220
  • [45] Planning for water quality in OH: What role(s) for planners?
    Conroy, Maria Manta
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2018, 88 : 39 - 45
  • [46] Beyond the backyard: Unraveling the geographies of citizens' engagement in digital participatory planning
    Kajosaari, Anna
    Schorn, Martina
    Hasanzadeh, Kamyar
    Rinne, Tiina
    Rossi, Saana
    Kytta, Marketta
    ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING B-URBAN ANALYTICS AND CITY SCIENCE, 2024,
  • [47] Taking citizens seriously: Participatory planning and 'Land Literacy' in Kerala, India
    Fischer, F
    REVIVAL OF STRATEGIC SPATIAL PLANNING, 2000, 181 : 109 - 120
  • [48] Urban ecosystems: What would Tansley do?
    Pickett S.T.A.
    Grove J.M.
    Urban Ecosystems, 2009, 12 (1) : 1 - 8
  • [49] What modifications would you make in the hypoglycemic treatment of this patient?
    Michan Dona, Alfredo
    AVANCES EN DIABETOLOGIA, 2010, 26 (01): : 56 - 58
  • [50] What would make children read for pleasure more frequently?
    Merga, Margaret K.
    ENGLISH IN EDUCATION, 2017, 51 (02) : 207 - 223