2009
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8952-7_15
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Enhancing Comprehensive Planning with Public Engagement and Planning Support Integration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In other words, a people-oriented development plan should reflect the sufficient concern and views from the public sector. As a result, some researchers have tried to include a collaborative way and integrate participatory techniques into the planning support tools to enhance the public engagement in urban (land use) planning and also develop more effective participation methods for this profession [49][50][51][52]. Undoubtedly, PSS provide an environment in which land use models can be utilized to support the planning.…”
Section: For Land Use Planning (Or Urban Planning)mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In other words, a people-oriented development plan should reflect the sufficient concern and views from the public sector. As a result, some researchers have tried to include a collaborative way and integrate participatory techniques into the planning support tools to enhance the public engagement in urban (land use) planning and also develop more effective participation methods for this profession [49][50][51][52]. Undoubtedly, PSS provide an environment in which land use models can be utilized to support the planning.…”
Section: For Land Use Planning (Or Urban Planning)mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Democracy may give people the aspiration to become involved in planning but this may not necessarily lead to an actual engagement in planning unless the system is designed in such a way to facilitate it (Parker et al, 2010). Much of the literature suggests that the British planning system has created unfavourable conditions for collective participation within a substantially top-down planning system (Boaden et al, 1982;Bailey & Pill, 2015;Lane, 2005;Lieske et al, 2009;Morphet, 2008;Tewdwr-Jones, 2012), but others suggest that it is possible to reshape planning processes to become more bottom-up and facilitate some degree of community empowerment and citizen participation (Aitken, 2010;Bailey & Pill, 2015;Begg et al, 2015;Birchall & Simmons, 2002;Cullingworth, 1990;Matthews et al, 2015;Painter et al, 2011). However, whilst some question about the extent to which any empowerment was genuine (Brand & Gaffikin, 2007;Gallent & Robinson, 2012;Smith, 1981;Seabrook, 1984;Sturzaker, 2011), Baker et al (2007 pointed out that in relation to a previous round of reforms, the UK government identified that improving the effectiveness of citizen involvement was 'at the heart of the reformed planning system' and the government showed its determination to facilitate the effectiveness of citizen participation through various strategies.…”
Section: Externally Driven Motivation: Difference In Local Contexts and Participant Empowermentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although there is a growing body of literature on the application of the Internet and visualization tools in urban planning (e.g., Lieske et al., 2009; Lin and Geertman, 2015; Rotondo and Selicato, 2010; Tobias et al., 2016), little research has examined the complexity of participation and communication in the planning process against the background of the network society. The wide-scale promotion of public participation in China is also relatively recent: It started only in 2008 with the introduction of the Urban–Rural Planning Law.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%