Starting from the notion that collaborative rural planning focuses on policymaking through authentic dialogue, this article discusses the power dynamics that influence the planning process and product. It was motivated by the presumption that the understanding of collaborative policymaking is not adequate if it only concerns formal deliberation without considering other power dynamics. Booher and Innes’s model of network power in collaborative policymaking (DIAD–Diversity, Interdependence, Authentic Dialogue) and the power cube model of Gaventa were used to analyze the power mechanisms in the formal as well as in the informal arenas. They were applied to the process of village planning in Pematang Tengah, Indonesia, where the agrarian village community, deliberative bureaucrats, and other stakeholders are involved in formulating development rural planning projects. From the analysis a new model was derived, revealing three power mechanisms that are active in three different phases of the collaborative planning process: (I) Figuring out in openness, (II) Herding of public desire, and (III) Forcing of direction. The findings show that power mechanism (II) in the informal arena plays an important role by steering the course of policymaking in the formal arena (I). Power mechanism (III) is active when invisible actors illegitimately change the planning product that the formal deliberation has produced, acting out of self-interest. The analysis of power mechanisms that are active in the whole planning process can help planners in dealing with formal and informal power when developing appropriate planning strategies through a deliberative process.
This article focuses on a specific discussion regarding how rural planning in Indonesia can provide an understanding of deliberative planning practice. It contributes to the literature related to deliberative planning in a non-western rural context. Primary data were collected from interviews with 23 respondents in Pematang Tengah village, Indonesia. Secondary data, consisting of scientific literature, research reports, and internet sources, were used, as well. Observations were conducted to reveal the way development projects are practically proposed in hamlet and village forums. Different stages of the process were identified and it was concluded that two deliberative mechanisms were used, more precisely directed deliberation and disjointed deliberation. Directed deliberation is an open dialogue that is overseen by all stakeholders. Alternatively, disjointed deliberation is conducted in a separate, informal arena and it is initiated by the local elites. The findings show that the disjointed deliberation in the informal arena can disturb the deliberative ideals, but it can also help to make the formal deliberation successful and fulfil the deliberative ideals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.