2018
DOI: 10.2495/sdp180661
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Implementing Collaborative Planning in the Swedish Mountains – The Case of Vilhelmina

Abstract: Critical appraisals have stressed the need for participation and social learning in spatial planning, and planning is now seen as a process of innovative collaboration by multiple actors. During such "collaborative planning", various parties try to develop new inclusive strategies through dialog. Collaborative planning is a major strand of current planning theory and highlights the need for new methods that involve citizen participation. In Sweden, the realization of collaborative planning in practice remains … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

2
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 27 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Data pertaining to Vilhelmina are drawn from observations and written documentation from focus groups with representatives of Sami interests who worked on the vision and priorities for the municipality's new MCP. For a detailed description of the participatory planning process and role of the research team, see Bjärstig, Thellbro, Zachrisson, and Svensson (2018a). These data were complemented by political referrals and statements (see Appendix for a detailed summary of the empirical material).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Data pertaining to Vilhelmina are drawn from observations and written documentation from focus groups with representatives of Sami interests who worked on the vision and priorities for the municipality's new MCP. For a detailed description of the participatory planning process and role of the research team, see Bjärstig, Thellbro, Zachrisson, and Svensson (2018a). These data were complemented by political referrals and statements (see Appendix for a detailed summary of the empirical material).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%