Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

The Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

Jonathan Walters
PLAN 300: Planning Theory
Dr. Jennifer Dean
November 21, 2014

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

Introduction
The objective of this report is to provide highly informed arguments, drawing from multiple
different sources, to show why participatory planning is a great benefit to the planning process.
Participatory planning, defined in this report, is the involvement of members of the public in
activities typically done by planners, and occasionally government officials. Often times when
non-planners discuss participatory planning, it is said to be at one of the two extremes: either it is
really great (seen as a way for ordinary people to influence major decisions) or it really horrible
(seen as a shallow process which does not actually seek the opinions of ordinary people). This
dichotomous view is not just among members of the public, it is also highly entangled in the
minds of planners and as a result, it is heavily debated in planning theory. For example, one idea
rising in prominence in planning theory is that participatory planning is disrespectful to the
abilities of planners (Duarte, 2014). Planners put a lot of effort into developing the best strategies
possible, so having to change these strategies based on the opinions of some people without any
formal planning education is tantamount to being told that these people know planning better
than you do. This view is common amongst the more prideful planners, the view of the more
compassionate planners is at the other end of the extreme. They view it as a great way to
empower locals, who are typically ignored, and create plans better suited to the desires of the
people being affected by them. But it is not just planning theory, planning practice shares these
opposing views. An increasing amount of cities are incorporating participatory planning
components in developing all major projects and plans through methods such as workshops and
community meetings. (Ataov, 2007). Conversely, other cities are trying to minimize the amount
of influence the public has on their projects and plans either by eliminating the participatory
methods altogether or by using the methods but only as a formality, not to actually hear the ideas

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

of the people (Moran, 2004). This paper aims to persuade those who think extremely poorly
about participatory planning, as well as those without an opinion about it, to see the great
potential it holds to improve the planning process. Next in this report is an introduction the three
main arguments which will be used to show the benefits of participatory planning, followed by a
critical analysis of how planning theory has influenced these arguments. This is followed by an
examination of how these arguments have affected planning practice, and then the conclusion,
which will make a final statement about the impact of participatory planning on planning theory
and practice.

Main Arguments - in Support of Participatory Planning

The first main argument is that participatory planning makes the process of planning
more equitable for the people of the public (Figure 1. [note all images are located at the end of
this report]). Planners have tremendous control over what happens in cities: they can decide how
people travel, where they go shopping, and what kind of amenities will go in the local public
park. Many think that they have too much control; they do not think that these decisions, which
can affect several thousands of people, should be made by just a few planners. These people
think that more power should be given to the ordinary people because the ones whom are
affected by the plans ought to have some say in how the plans are made (Sakellariadi, 2013).
They do not want total control over planning decisions, just enough control to let their desires be
incorporated into the plans; this sharing of power is why participatory planning is more
equitable. This effect is especially strong in developing countries, where the enormous amounts
of people makes it difficult to include many people in the making of planning decisions (Pugh,
2013).

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

The second main argument is that participatory planning makes projects more effective
(Figure 2.). For example, lets say planners are trying to set up a new bus system for a city. They
could decide the number of buses to use and how often they should run by simply looking at
population data or by studying successful bus systems in other cities, but these are not effective
ways of predicting human behaviour. A better strategy would be to consult as many members of
the public as possible, through either a large survey or a series of consultation meetings, so that it
can be determined exactly how much demand there is for the new bus system, and use this
information to choose the most appropriate amount of buses and running times. The addition of
participatory planning can result in a much better bus system being developed, but the benefits
do not apply just to bus systems, projects of all types and scales can be made more effective by
including citizens in the decision making process (Tarsitano, 2006).

The third main argument is that participatory planning improves the relationship between
planners (and sometimes government officials) and the people of the public (Figure 3.). By
working together, the two groups learn more about each other, which will allow for even more
harmonious work to be done in the future (Kar & Kar, 2002). Aside from just spending time with
each other, the relationship is also improved through increased transparency. Without
participatory planning, most people would not have any idea how a secondary plan for a
particular community is created, making it easy for people to criticize the plans, but by learning
about all the effort put into these plans, they gain more respect for them. This means they are less
likely to oppose future decisions made by planners, which further improves their relationship by
getting rid of the typical tension between planners and members of the public (Baggett, Jeffrey,
& Jefferson, 2006).

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

The Influence of Planning Theory on the Main Arguments

The argument of better equity for citizens has been influenced by the planning theory of planning
expertise and legitimacy (from Week 3). The theory discusses who is qualified to do planning
work: is it all planners, only expert planners or some other group (Healy, 2010). This is where
the idea that ordinary people with no formal planning education might be able to competently do
planning work comes from; it is this idea that is used to justify allowing the public to have
tremendous influence over the development of a plan or project. The theory also mentions that
there is an increasing appreciation for consensus-based decision making being used to make
planning decisions (McCann, 2001). Decision through consensus is pretty much the ultimate
form of equity, as it insures absolutely no one will be ignored.
The equity argument has also been influenced by the planning theory of politics,
organization and power (week 9). The theory talks about the rise of alternative, more informal,
methods of control over planning projects (Fox-Rodgers & Murphy, 2014). These methods
typically give more control to members of the public, thereby increasing the amount of equity the
people have in relation to the planners. The theory also discusses why we typically let planners
have so much control over projects, and finds that a major reason is because planners are thought
to have a much better understanding about the interconnections of various aspects of the world
such as the connections between the environment and the economy (Harvey, 1996). This thought
is important as it is a clear argument against equity and participatory planning strategies, since it
is thought that the people of the public can not possibly have better ideas than planners so
consulting with them is just a waste of time.

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

The argument of improved effectiveness of projects has been influenced by the theory of rational
comprehensive planning (week 4). This theory is concerned with using quantitative data to
account to assess the value of proposed projects (Lindblom, 1959). This is detrimental to the
spread of it because participatory planning typically only produces qualitative data, which is
often viewed as unimportant or irrelevant by supporters of the rational comprehensive model.
The theory also discusses why planners try to make decisions rationally, and proposes that better
decisions could be made through other ways of thinking (Baum, 1996). This anti-rational
sentiment is beneficial to participatory planning as it allows greater weight to be placed on the
desires of those most emotional, which is usually those most affected, and catering projects to the
needs of those most affected will make the project more effective.
This argument has also been influenced by the planning theory of New Urbanism (week
11). One of the key ideas of this theory is the creation of areas with a 'sense of community'
(Talen, 1999). This relates to creating more effective projects since essential to the creation of a
sense of community is finding out what the residents desire, and the easiest way to discover these
desires is through participatory planning; a plan which accounts for these desires will surely be
more effective than one which does not. The theory mentions that a lot of people are critical of
New Urbanism because they do not understand the principles behind it (Ellis, 2002). This
highlights the need for more transparency in planning activities (so that the public is better
informed), which can be attained through participatory planning, and relates to the increased
effectiveness because working with knowledgeable people will result in a more effective project.

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

The argument of better relationships between planners and members of the public has been
influenced by the planning theory of advocacy and social justice (week 5). Advocacy is the idea
of planners being representatives of the interests of various groups, including the people if the
public (Davidoff, 1965). This emphasizes the need for strong relationships between planners and
the public (since planners can not be their advocates unless they know them well), and this
strong relationship can be built through participatory planning. One aspect of social justice is
concerned with being knowledgeable about the culture of others (Umemoto, 2001). This is one
of the main drivers for participatory planning in multicultural cities, and the people in these cities
seek to form good relationships not only with planners but with each other as well, which can
happen through participatory planning.
This argument has also been influenced by the planning theory of diversity and pluralism
(week 7). This theory discusses extensively how to create a cohesive community in an area with
an extremely diverse population (Sandercock, 2000). This is complementary to participatory
planning since building strong bonds between planners and members of the public is an initial
step in the creation of an entirely cohesive community. Pluralistic is a characteristic which many
cities strive to attain (Fainstein, 2005). In order to achieve pluralism, it is important that new
immigrants view local figures of power (such as planners) as helpful rather than uncaring; in
order to create this positive view of planners, participatory planning can be used.

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

Impact of Arguments on Planning Practice Bolivia Case Study

A case in which participatory planning has led to: better equity for the people of the
public, the creation of more effective projects, and improved relationships between planners and
citizens can be seen in Bolivia. In 1994, Bolivia wanted to help empower its many peasants, and
it decided that the best method to do this was through public participation (Goudsmit &
Blackburn, 2001). The country had never had any wide-scale participatory planning strategies
before, so initially there were a lot of methodological issues, but eventually a good system was
developed (Pellegrini, 2012). Bolivia's 'Law of Popular Participation' was so great at creating an
equitable division of power that the first election after the implementation of the law resulted in
one-third of the new councillors and mayors being the peasants who just a few years ago had no
political involvement experience (Goudsmit & Blackburn, 2001). The election of these peasants
resulted in a different perspective being present during the development of policies, and this
perspective (the one of the poor people) is the most important as the majority of Bolivia's
citizens are peasants (Pellegrini, 2012) ; this addition of a new perspective allowed for more
informed decisions to be made regarding both policy and project development, resulting in the
implemented projects and policies being much more profitable, timely, and effective (Eder et al.,
2012). An additional benefit of the peasants being elected is that the millions of poor Bolivians
felt a stronger connection to the government, since now they thought of many of the government
officials are 'one of them' (Goudsmit & Blackburn, 2001). After just a few years of practicing
participatory planning, Bolivia was able to drastically improve equity for its peasants,
significantly increase the effectiveness and efficiency of their projects and policies, and create
much stronger relationships between officials (mostly government workers, but also some
planners) and the people of the public.

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

CONCLUSION
In this report it was shown that participatory planning: improves the equability of planning
processes for the people of the public, makes planning projects more effective, and strengthens
the relationship between planners and the members of the public. These benefits have been made
possible due to the support of various planning theories, and are now helping many people by
participatory planning systems being implemented in cities throughout the world. The objective
of this paper is to provide arguments showing the great benefits of participatory planning, in the
hopes of better informing those who are not knowledgeable about this topic. Participatory
planning is becoming an increasingly popular subject of discussion in both developed and
developing countries, although perceptions still vary between the two extremes of extremely
beneficial and completely useless (Ataov, 2007). It possesses great potential to help empower the
many politically weak citizens of developing countries (as seen in the Bolivia study), and can
give more of a voice to the urban poor in developed countries; however, it is not a perfect
process, and there have been many cases in which attempts at participatory planning have been
complete failures due to various issues including too high costs and unwillingness of the public
to engage in it (McTague & Jakubowski, 2013). Three arguments were made in this report to
show its benefits, but it is ultimately up to the reader to decide whether or not participatory
planning truly is beneficial.

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

Images

Figure 1: Participatory planning increases the equity of

planning processes through the inclusion of
locals in the decision making process.

Figure 2: Participatory planning allows for more

perspectives to be used in the development
of projects, resulting in a more informed,
and therefore effective project.

10

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

Figure 3: Participatory planning allows strong connections to develop between

planners and members of the public.

11

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

12

WORKS CITED
Ataov, A. (2007). Democracy to become reality: Participatory planning through action research.
Habitat International, 31(3-4), 333-344.
Baggett, S., Jeffrey, P., & Jefferson, B. (2006). Risk perception in participatory planning for
water reuse. Desalination, 187(1-3), 149-158.
Baum, H. (1996). Why the rational paradigm persists: Tales from the field. Journal of Planning
Education and Practice, 15(2), 127-135.
Davidoff, P. (1965). Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the American Institute of
Planners, 31(4), 331-338.
Duarte, R. (2014). The fall of planning expertise. Retrieved from
http://www.planetizen.com/node/69263
Eder, C. c., Schooley, J., Fullerton, J., & Murguia, J. (2012). Assessing impact and sustainability
of health, water, and sanitation interventions in Bolivia six years post-project. Pan
American Journal Of Public Health, 32(1), 43-48.
Ellis, C. (2002). The new urbanism: Critiques and rebuttals. Journal of Urban Design, 7(3), 261291
Fainstein, S. (2005). Cities and diversity: Should we want it? Can we plan for it? Urban Affairs
Review, 41(1), 3-19.
Fox-Rodgers, L., & Murphy, E. (2014). Informal strategies of power in the local planning
system. Planning Theory, 13(3), 244-268.
Goudsmit, I. & Blackburn, J. (2001). Participatory municipal planning in Bolivia: An ambiguous
experience. Development in Practice, 11(5), 587-596.
Harvey, D. (1996). On planning the ideology of planning. In S. Campbell 7 S. Fainstein (Eds).
Readings in planning theory, 176-197. Oxford: Blackwell.
Healy, P. (2010). Making better places: The planning project in the 21st century. New York:
MacMillan. Chapters 1 & 8.
Kar, N., & Kar, B. (2002). Social cognition and the participatory planning process. Systems
Research and Behavioral Science, 19(4), 377-382.
Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review, 7988.
McCann, E. J. (2001). Collaborative visioning or urban planning as therapy? The politics of

Evolving Benefits of Participatory Planning

13

public-private policy making. The Professional Geographer, 53(2), 207-218.

McTague, C., & Jakubowski, S. (2013). Marching to the beat of a silent drum: Wasted
consensus-building and failed neighborhood participatory planning. Applied Geography,
44, 182-191.
Moran, M. (2004). The practice of participatory planning at Mapoon Aboriginal settlement:
Towards community control, ownership and autonomy. Australian Geographical Studies,
42(3), 339-355.
Participatory Planning (A) [Photograph]. Retrieved from
http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Programs/Agriculture_and_the_Environment/Climate_Change
_and_Water/Pages/ArticleDetails.aspx?PublicationID=1197
Participatory Planning (B) [Photograph]. Retrieved from
http://www.gopixpic.com/557/participatory-planning-is-difficult-enough-why-not-strivefor-apples-/http:||www*thenatureofcities*com|wp-content|uploads|2014|03|Scenarios557x420*jpg/
Participatory Planning (C) [Photograph]. Retrieved from
http://www.magicalurbanism.com/archives/5789
Pellegrini, L. (2012). Planning and natural resources in Bolivia: Between rules without
participation and participation without rules. Journal of Developing Societies, 28(2), 185202.
Pugh, J. (2013). Speaking without voice: Participatory planning, acknowledgement, and latent
subjectivity in Barbados. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(5),
1266-1281.
Sakellariadi, A. (2013). Strategic participatory planning in archaeological management in
Greece: The Philippi Management Plan for nomination to UNESCOs World Heritage
List. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 15(1), 13-29.
Sandercock, L. (2000). When strangers become neighbours: Managing cities of difference.
Planning Theory and Practice, 1(1), 13-30.
Talen, E. (1999). Sense of community and neighbourhood form: An assessment of the social
doctrine of new urbanism. Urban Studies, 36(8), 1361-1379.
Tarsitano, E. (2006). Interaction between the environment and animals in urban settings:
Integrated and participatory planning. Environmental Management, 38(5), 799-809.
Umemoto, K. (2001). Walking in another's shoes: Epistemological challenges in participatory
planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21(1), 17-31.