Participatory urban planning in the digital era

Staffans, Aija; Kahila-Tani, Maarit; Kyttä, Marketta

doi:10.4337/9781788971089.00030

Cited by 15 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These experts stress the need for repeated and reflective empirical PSS workshop evaluation studies. In the same vein, Staffans et al (2020b) envisage collaborative planning processes as ongoing collaboration arenas in which large-scale public participation processes to identify innovative ideas are followed-up by small-scale expert collaboration processes to select and work on the proposed ideas. Referring to the city of Helsinki, they suggest that crucially important is that '.…”

Section: Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…. contextualize PSS by establishing a closer link between the worlds of academics and practitioners' (Luque-Mart ın and Pfeffer, 2020: 291), while others stress the impact of the 'dominant policy model' when they characterize this as entrepreneurialism (Lieske, 2020), or the contextual impact of 'specific characteristics of information, knowledge and instruments' within the 'dominant planning style' of collaborative planning, as expressed by Staffans et al (2020b) as 'knowledge is embedded in social relations and generated in knowledge networks which make communicative actions substantive in planning processes' (310).…”

Section: Pssciencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Planning support science: Developments and challenges

Geertman

Stillwell

2020

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we provide an update of recent developments and forthcoming challenges in the field of planning support systems, following earlier reviews in 2003 and 2009. The rationale for this update is the rapid development of information and communication technologies and their impact on planning support systems. After a brief retrospective assessment of past planning support system developments, the paper presents a synthesis of the experiences and views of a worldwide sample of invited planning support system experts, whose innovative contributions comprise a new Handbook of Planning Support Science. The developments documented by the experts together substantiate our impression that a fundamental transformation is taking place – a paradigm shift – wherein the field of planning support systems is maturing into a planning support science. From this perspective, it is expected that planning support systems will become indispensable instruments in the planning process in the not too distant future. The signs of this maturation are already visible in research, education and practice.

show abstract

Section: Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pssciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Planning support science: Developments and challenges

Geertman

Stillwell

2020

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite its advantages, technology is not the sole answer to issues of participatory planning. The PPGIS method should be integrated with other public engagement activities, especially face-to-face activities, because wider inclusion of both collective and individual participation methods is needed to reach a broader spectrum of people, embracing a plurality of societal voices (Staffans et al, 2020). Nonetheless, the focus on implementation should be in the early phases of planning process, allowing for the benefits from data volume and method flexibility to improve both the decisions and the process itself.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What could transport planning practice learn from public participation GIS method?

Mladenović¹,

Kyttä-Pirjola²,

Forss³

et al. 2021

Transport in Human Scale Cities

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Digitalization and internet-based participatory tools make it possible to participate in new ways (Horelli 2002;Afzalan & Muller 2018;Staffans, Kahila-Tani & Kyttä 2020) and many governments around the world use electronic participation methods to engage their citizens. (Tsai et al 2006;Kingston 2013;Valtioneuvoston kanslia 2016: 73;Oliveira, Oliver & Ramalhinho 2020).…”

Section: Background and Research Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The participation of citizens in land use planning and decision-making in Northern areas – the potential of PPGIS in increasing interaction

Kantola¹

2021

NGP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This doctoral dissertation studies the use of the public participation geographic information system (PPGIS) in land use planning and decision-making in sparsely populated Northern regions. The main research question is: What types of practices and knowledge does PPGIS bring to public participation in land use planning in Northern regions? Sparsely populated Northern regions pose a specific challenge for planning. In those regions, land ownership by the state or the municipality is general and there are many different interests by locals and non-locals in the same regions. The reconciliation of different land uses is essential because of the many interests (e.g., tourism, nature conservation, mining, forestry, indigenous people, interests of locals and non-locals, recreation and reindeer herding). The different roles of the information, land use and the development of the participation and interaction in land use planning are in focus. The relevant question is who and which interests lead land use planning and decisions. In this research, the participation in land use planning processes in sparsely populated Northern regions has been examined and participation possibilities have been developed with a mixed method approach. Both qualitative and quantitative methods have been used in the data collection and analysis. The best practices of the use of PPGIS have been studied as well as the novelty of the PPGIS knowledge. The implementation of PPGIS data in decision making, one of the biggest challenges in the field of PPGIS research, has also been examined. The approach of the research is empirical. The research is a case study and three different sets of data have been collected from Finnish Lapland, sparsely populated regions, from 2015 - 2019. This research used electronic and paper PPGIS, interviews and studying reports and documents. The data is qualitative, quantitative and spatial, and was analyzed with the principles of theory driven content analysis and GIS analyzing methods (theme maps). The results show that the maintenance and development of the participation possibilities in land use planning are an important part of democratic society. It is essential to maintain discussion, debate, criticism and right of appeal. In the Northern regions with many land use interests, there is no one right way to involve people. The participation is context sensitive; the involvement process and involvement groups need to be estimated in every situation, place and context. PPGIS has the possibility to improve interaction in sparsely populated regions. The benefits of PPGIS appeared strongly for different data, for example, visually and presenting data on the map in the spatial mode, the possibility to virtually and remotely collect information from a big audience (both locals and non-locals) and the possibility to handle and combine a large amount of digitalized, spatial data. Increasing trust and transparency between different groups were remarkable issues as well. In sparsely populated regions, the fear of stigma is important to take into account when people participate. Thus, PPGIS can encourage people to participate in the land use planning processes due to its characteristics of maintaining anonymity. It is essential that PPGIS method is used for the real, and even acute, land use needs and thus, motivating respondents to answer is easier and the likelihood of the results being used increases. If the use of the PPGIS method is not strongly linked to the planning process, the results might be of little consequence. Hence, it is recommended that the use of PPGIS is connected with the planning process and in the early phases. The interest of the organizational managers toward the PPGIS method is essential so that the benefits would be as strong as possible. The PPGIS method cannot replace other participation methods, but it is good to view as one tool in participation and collecting social spatial data. When the PPGIS method is used, it is important to be critical because the tool is often a commercial product and there is a risk that the needs of the user are not responded to, for example, with the technical characteristics. Making an internet-based PPGIS survey is relatively easy, but it is relevant to use sufficiently deep analysis after gathering the data, for example, with GIS analyzing methods. Systematic storing of PPGIS data in the IT-system of the organization is crucial so that the information is subsequently easy to access. Keywords PPGIS, land use planning, participation, reconciliation of land use interests, sparsely populated Northern areas

show abstract

Participatory urban planning in the digital era

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Planning support science: Developments and challenges

Planning support science: Developments and challenges

What could transport planning practice learn from public participation GIS method?

The participation of citizens in land use planning and decision-making in Northern areas – the potential of PPGIS in increasing interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About