Participatory numbers for integrating knowledge and actions in development

Assessing the state of the art in community engagement for participatory decision-making in disaster risk-sensitive urban development

“…providing education and vocational training and increasing awareness) [ 6 ] PROCESS Stakeholder engagement process The existing engagement process appears to be complicated with ill-defined aim and objectives, no proper timeline, weak administrative structures, and policy breakdowns. Planners and policymakers should not set unrealistic targets for participation [ 37 ] Related laws and regulations regarding the community participation process in the municipal processes and services should be issued [ 66 ] Ensure giving sufficient time for obtaining the results from new participatory organisations for sustainable development [ 2 , 35 ] Use of three key measures for the evaluation of community suggestions regarding urban development: (1) public satisfaction; (2) a better final product; (3) community empowerment [ 43 ] Communities should be empowered to bring forward local place plans, and these plans should form part of the development plan [ 71 ] Use of quantitative participatory methods and participatory numbers to identify appropriate stakeholders [ 7 ] Stakeholder mapping for integrating different forms of knowledge [ 7 , 40 , 76 , 78 ] Implementation of co-production models [ 79 , 80 ] Focus on making the planning process more accessible, user-friendly and relevant [ 37 ] Generate community engagement processes that can adapt to a variety of urban, regional and rural settings [ 38 ] Careful preparation of the consultation process [ 40 ] Inclusive and accessible practice Community participation structures finalised by decision-makers are not always productive since they have the potential to exclude some communities due to event logistics, partisanships, cultural and language discriminations, and administrative delays. Consider (a) the timing of events, childcare provision, wheelchair access and transport, and (b) how events are publicised, how the material is distributed, jargon-free language, braille and large print formats, translation into other languages [ 36 ] <...>…”

“…Use of quantitative participatory methods and participatory numbers to identify appropriate stakeholders [ 7 ]…”

“…Furthermore, communities should be empowered to bring forward local place plans, and their plans should form part of the development plans [ 71 ]. In addition, the current participatory processes can be further improved by the pre-determination of correct stakeholders with the use of quantitative participatory methods (such as ranking, counting and scoring, enumeration, mapping, piling, timeline and calendar, pair-wise ranking and matrixes, measuring, and Venn diagrams) for the better integration of top-down and bottom-up actions in DRR [ 7 ]. Early participatory mapping [ 7 , 40 , 76 , 78 ] and the implementation of core-production models [ 79 , 80 ] will help to integrate different forms of knowledge for the successful accomplishment of inclusive developments.…”

“…In addition, the current participatory processes can be further improved by the pre-determination of correct stakeholders with the use of quantitative participatory methods (such as ranking, counting and scoring, enumeration, mapping, piling, timeline and calendar, pair-wise ranking and matrixes, measuring, and Venn diagrams) for the better integration of top-down and bottom-up actions in DRR [ 7 ]. Early participatory mapping [ 7 , 40 , 76 , 78 ] and the implementation of core-production models [ 79 , 80 ] will help to integrate different forms of knowledge for the successful accomplishment of inclusive developments. It is further recommended to make the planning process more accessible, user-friendly and relevant [ 37 ], to generate community engagement processes that can adapt to a variety of urban, regional and rural settings [ 38 ], and to undertake a careful preparation of the consultation process [ 40 ] to improve stakeholder engagement processes.…”

“…As a result, government policies are being implemented giving little consideration to local knowledge of vulnerable communities [ 3 , 5 ]. Consequently, community knowledge and their concerns of disaster risks in the locality are being ignored in urban planning and development projects [ 3 , 6 , 7 ], hence failing to capture locally significant factors. This state poses a challenge for achieving equitable and sustainable developments that address the concerns of vulnerable communities since only the governmental strategies which are typically concerned with economic growth are given priority.…”