Participatory planning and children's emotional labor in the production of urban nature

Questions of agency: Capacity, subjectivity, spatiality and temporality

“…In these accounts, we see decentred, though still specifically human, subjects whose embodied, fleshy corporeality is marked and framed in relations of power. They are not bounded, rational subjects, but ones forged through intersubjective relationships of emotional recognition and practical, foundational, interdependence (Holt, 2013), in part acting in ways which are beyond conscious (Blazek, 2015;Bosco and Joassart-Marcelli, 2015;Kustatscher, 2017).…”

Children's Participation in Urban Planning and Design: A Systematic Review

“…In this context, children are treated as partners and collaborators of the process (Adams et al, 2017;Pawlowski et al, 2017, researchers and environmental change agents (Malone, 2013), clients (Racelis & Aguirre, 2005), and active participants with the aim of educating adults ( Francis & Lorenzo, 2002;Francis & Lorenzo, 2006;Ito et al, 2010;Nelson, 2008;Oliver et al, 2011;Severcan, 2015;Woolley et al, 1999). Additionally, children can become emotional laborers in the process of planning, as seen through the work of Bosco and Joassart-Marcelli (2015). They focus on the problematic side of only involving children as "consultants" rather than individuals with ideas and knowledge.…”

“…There is also a need to encourage parents to think about ways through which children can be made more visible within cities (Francis & Lorenzo, 2002) and, importantly, what is currently missing in this regard. Although the importance of having multiple levels of diversity within the stakeholder group is essential (Derr & Tarantini, 2016), researchers such as Bosco and Joassart-Marcelli (2015) have identified a possibility that the voices of children could be diluted when there are too many stakeholders involved. These concerns should be kept in mind when executing the practice of planning with children to ensure the process remains focused first and foremost on the wants and needs of the children.…”

“…Communication between parties can be facilitated through assisting adults where a shift in power-sharing is observed (Wilks & Rudner, 2013), with some limitations in terms of what these actors can and cannot do (Alparone & Rissotto, 2001;Bosco & Joassart-Marcelli, 2015;Corsi, 2002;Francis & Lorenzo, 2006;Nieuwenhuys, 1997). Though the assumption that children are not capable of acting in their own best interests is (still) widespread, the researcher/facilitator should play the role of mediator while avoiding being a figure of authority and control (Nieuwenhuys, 1997).…”

“…Although participatory planning research with children can provide a power-sharing platform that reduces barriers between researchers and children (Wilks & Rudner, 2013) and aims to give voice to children to collect their knowledge, experience, and perspectives (Derr & Kovács, 2015), Wilks & Rudner (2013) warn that this approach can include a tendency towards tokenistic consultation processes. Manipulation may also occur in which children's emotions are devalued through emotional geographies underlining children's participation (Bosco & Joassart-Marcelli, 2015) PAR, the second approach that is frequently adopted, is sometimes misused. If the practice of planning with children leads to a level of power sharing in decision-making, this could be classified as active research (Nieuwenhuys, 1997).…”