Participatory Planning

Spatial planning systems across the world influence the places and spaces where people work and live and are deemed to operate in the public interest to ensure that land use planning and development result in more sustainable communities. This is a complex task, given the diverse nature of public, private, and community interests affected by and involved in the planning system and process. Whether it be for ensuring that development occurs where communities need it or for the protection and enhancement of the natural and historic environment and the countryside, planning affects most people. As the outcomes from planning affect everyone, it is widely recognized that community residents should have the opportunity to play a role in delivering effective and inclusive planning. Participatory planning is therefore vitally important for the achievement of sustainable development. This entry outlines the emergence of participatory planning in the 1960s and examines why the current practice of collaborative planning came about and how participatory processes operate.

During the 1960s, there was a dramatic shift in the direction of planning from a post–World War II blueprint model to that of systems analysis and control, which built on the classical work of the British planner Patrick Geddes linking cities to the functioning of ecosystems with a greater need to understand how cities worked. This paradigm focused on four dimensions of understanding the urban system: (1) the role of persistent human activities, (2) the role of human communications, (3) the role of adapted spaces, and (4) the role of communication channels. While human activities and communication channels were highlighted in these approaches, they were very technocratic, and this led to further criticism of the role of the public in planning. Jane Jacobs asserted the view that planners imposed ideals rather than understanding processes and functions. Others provided interesting critiques of these approaches and suggested that an advocacy approach was required, causing a shift in emphasis for participatory planning. The main points of these arguments were that city and regional planners could not be value-neutral technicians, as values are part of every planning process. Public planners cannot attempt to produce a plan that represents the public interest because of the diverse nature of society. Instead, it was suggested that planning should be pluralistic and should represent diverse interests. An idealized notion of participatory planning therefore needs to encourage people or stakeholders to propose their own plans, with neighborhood groups and other stakeholders involved in the plan preparation and development process.

Figure 1 The eight rungs of Arnstein's participation ladder

Source: Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.

Sherry Arnstein's famous Ladder of Citizen Participation (Figure 1) depicted participation as a series of rungs on a ladder. Her article argues that by recognizing these gradations it is possible to develop a clearer understanding of participation in planning. Since the publication of this article, much of the focus in planning has concentrated on process and has resolved none of the political problems that are inherent in planning. Many believe that planning is a technical discipline and that problems can be solved through a scientific understanding, with planners knowing what is best for the common interest.

...