Author
Listed:
- Mattias Hjerpe
(Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Department of Thematic Studies―Environmental Change, Linköping University, Sweden)
- Erik Glaas
(Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Department of Thematic Studies―Environmental Change, Linköping University, Sweden)
- Sofie Storbjörk
(Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Department of Thematic Studies―Environmental Change, Linköping University, Sweden)
Abstract
How to organize citizen participation in planning is continuously debated. The amount of Online Participatory Tools (OPTs) to facilitate inclusive and efficient participation has increased. While studies have assessed their functionality, usability and effectiveness in planning, they have rarely analyzed OPTs beyond single-cases, targeted tools that are widely used or assessed how OPTs affect broader values of participation. Targeting this absence, this study analyzes how ten applications of a widely used OPT, CityPlanner™, affect the normative, substantive and instrumental values of citizen participatory planning in Swedish cities. By analyzing 1,354 citizen proposals and interviewing urban planners, we find that citizens more extensively submit proposals and initiate debates on planning when using the OPT. Results suggest a more even age and gender distribution among proposal users than with conventional methods, facilitating normative values of participation. The OPT was generally applied early in planning and generated high-quality inputs. Our results, however, nuance previous analyses by also emphasizing the importance of place-specificity of OPT applications and of joint participation strategies among departments. Key for OPT development includes the need to improve their ability to analyze overarching trends among inputs.
Suggested Citation
Mattias Hjerpe & Erik Glaas & Sofie Storbjörk, 2018.
"Scrutinizing Virtual Citizen Involvement in Planning: Ten Applications of an Online Participatory Tool,"
Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(3), pages 159-169.
Handle:
RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:3:p:159-169
DOI: 10.17645/pag.v6i3.1481
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:3:p:159-169. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.