Participation according to the law?: The research-based knowledge on citizen participation in Norwegian municipal planning

Abstract

Citizen participation is enshrined in the Norwegian Planning and Building Act (PBA) 1985 and accentuated by the 2008 revision of the PBA. In this article, we ask if the research on participation in municipal planning is sufficient to draw conclusions on whether the Act is effective with regard to both the spirit and the letter of the law. The guiding framework for the analysis is based on the concepts of input and output legitimacy and the distinction between 'tidy' and 'untidy' participation. The analysis is based on scientific publications published after the 2008 revision of the PBA. We find that the majority of the research concentrates on zoning plans and municipalityinitiated 'tidy' participation. As a result, there are gaps in the research with regard to both the planning context and the interconnectedness of different forms of participation. Therefore, the research reviewed can only partially inform the law-makers on the functioning of the Act.

How to build stakeholder participation in collaborative urban freight planning

“…Citizen participation in planning is given a high priority in the Norwegian Planning and Building Act in terms of general rules for consultations, publicity and information to ensure transparency, predictability and the participation of all affected parties (Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, 2008;Ringholm, Nyseth, & Gro, 2018). As early as in the 1985 version of the Act, the Ministry of Environment emphasised that 'for the planning, it is an advantage that views can be identified as early as possible, avoiding the process coming to a standstill because vital points of view are presented too late in the process' (Ministry of Climate and Environment, 1985).…”

“…While local zoning plans in Norway were traditionally predominately devised by public authorities, currently approximately 90% of urban zoning plans are initiated by private developers (Falleth et al, 2010). In 2013, 67% of local politicians reported that they were always in contact with developers in early planning stages (Ringholm et al, 2018). Ringholm et al (2018) state that detailed zoning plan processes tend to be non-transparent and inaccessible, even in cases where some level of participation is documented.…”

“…In 2013, 67% of local politicians reported that they were always in contact with developers in early planning stages (Ringholm et al, 2018). Ringholm et al (2018) state that detailed zoning plan processes tend to be non-transparent and inaccessible, even in cases where some level of participation is documented. The main contents of the plans are agreed upon by public planning officers and the market actors before the public hearing phase (Ringholm et al, 2018).…”

Investigating the use of visualization to improve public participation in infrastructure projects: how are digital approaches used and what value do they bring?

“…Public participation is important to ensure well-informed decisions, engagement and ownership of both democratic and community-based development (KMD, 2014). Although public participation has been a legal requirement in Norway since it was introduced in the Planning and Building Act in 1985, many have argued that the practice is far from satisfactory (Ringholm et al, 2018).…”

“…Similar barriers have been found specifically in a Norwegian planning context. Ringholm et al (2018) noted that citizens described the planning process as inaccessible and lacking transparency. Further, citizens taking part in public participation processes seldom consist of a representative sample of the population, resulting in the dominance of a limited number of opinions (Klausen et al, 2013).…”