IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i9p1412-d1469198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping and Assessing Effective Participatory Planning Processes for Urban Green Spaces in Aotearoa New Zealand’s Diverse Communities

Author

Listed:
  • Yiwen Cui

    (Te Kura Waihanga-School of Architecture, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6012, New Zealand)

  • Morten Gjerde

    (Department of Architecture & Planning, Norwegian University of Science & Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Bruno Marques

    (Te Kura Waihanga-School of Architecture, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6012, New Zealand)

Abstract

The multicultural landscape of Aotearoa New Zealand presents a rich tapestry of diversity and community needs, underscoring an imperative for inclusive participatory planning processes. This paper presents findings from an investigation of the challenges and opportunities inherent in community engagement initiatives, particularly within the context of New Zealand’s major ethnic groups, including New Zealand European, Māori, Chinese, and Pasifika. Drawing from the importance of community participation in reshaping public open spaces, this research addressed the gap in understanding which participatory planning processes are most effective across diverse cultural groups. To investigate the effectiveness of various approaches to community engagement, this research involved focus groups from the Wellington suburbs of Newtown and Porirua, utilising both on-site and online meetings. The findings identify the most effective participation processes for planning public open spaces in relation to each ethnicity. Correlations between participant preferences and their unique cultural backgrounds were assessed. In addition, the least effective participation methods along with several relatively effective participation methods are discussed. By highlighting engagement methods that can foster inclusivity, equity, and a sense of community, this research advances a collective goal of building a more cohesive and effective society for all its inhabitants.

Suggested Citation

  • Yiwen Cui & Morten Gjerde & Bruno Marques, 2024. "Mapping and Assessing Effective Participatory Planning Processes for Urban Green Spaces in Aotearoa New Zealand’s Diverse Communities," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:9:p:1412-:d:1469198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/9/1412/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/9/1412/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert B. Noland & Marc D. Weiner & Dong Gao & Michael P. Cook & Anton Nelessen, 2017. "Eye-tracking technology, visual preference surveys, and urban design: preliminary evidence of an effective methodology," Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 98-110, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nawaf Saeed Al Mushayt & Francesca Dal Cin & Sérgio Barreiros Proença, 2021. "New Lens to Reveal the Street Interface. A Morphological-Visual Perception Methodological Contribution for Decoding the Public/Private Edge of Arterial Streets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-21, October.
    2. Ruoshi Zhang & Weiyue Duan & Zhikai Zheng, 2024. "Multimodal Quantitative Research on the Emotional Attachment Characteristics between People and the Built Environment Based on the Immersive VR Eye-Tracking Experiment," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, January.
    3. Tingting Su & Kaiping Wang & Shuangshuang Li & Xinyan Wang & Huan Li & Huanru Ding & Yanfei Chen & Chenhui Liu & Min Liu & Yunlu Zhang, 2022. "Analysis and Optimization of Landscape Preference Characteristics of Rural Public Space Based on Eye-Tracking Technology: The Case of Huangshandian Village, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, December.
    4. Yu Wu & Zhixiong Zhuo & Qunyue Liu & Kunyong Yu & Qitang Huang & Jian Liu, 2021. "The Relationships between Perceived Design Intensity, Preference, Restorativeness and Eye Movements in Designed Urban Green Space," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-16, October.
    5. Ruochen Ma & Yuxin Luo & Katsunori Furuya, 2023. "Gender Differences and Optimizing Women’s Experiences: An Exploratory Study of Visual Behavior While Viewing Urban Park Landscapes in Tokyo, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-14, February.
    6. James Simpson & Kevin Thwaites & Megan Freeth, 2019. "Understanding Visual Engagement with Urban Street Edges along Non-Pedestrianised and Pedestrianised Streets Using Mobile Eye-Tracking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Wenqing Ding & Qinqin Wei & Jing Jin & Juanjuan Nie & Fanfan Zhang & Xiaotian Zhou & Youhua Ma, 2023. "Research on Public Space Micro-Renewal Strategy of Historical and Cultural Blocks in Sanhe Ancient Town under Perception Quantification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Anciaes, Paulo & Jones, Peter, 2020. "Transport policy for liveability – Valuing the impacts on movement, place, and society," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 157-173.

    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:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:9:p:1412-:d:1469198. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.