This book critically examines the public participation processes in urban planning and development by evaluating the operations of Planning Advisory Committees (PACs) through two meta-criteria of fairness and effectiveness. Traditional models of public participation in planning have long been criticized for separating planners from the public. This book proposes a novel conceptual model to address the gaps in existing practices in order to encourage greater public involvement in planning decisions and policymaking. It assesses the application of the evaluative framework for PACs as a new approach to public participation evaluation in urban planning. With a case study focused on the PACs in Inner City area of Canberra, Australia, the book offers a conceptual framework for evaluating fairness and effectiveness of the public participation processes that can also be extended to other countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada, Scandinavian countries, the European Union, and some Asian countries such as India. Offering valuable insights on how operational processes of PACs can be re-configured, this book will be a useful guide for students and academics of planning and public policy analysis, as well as the planning professionals in both developed and developing countries.

This book critically examines the public participation processes in urban planning and development by evaluating the operations of planning advisory committees through two meta-criteria of fairness and effectiveness.

Mirroring the complexities of cities and neighborhoods, this volume makes a conscious departure from consensus-oriented public participation to conflict-resolving public participation. In India, planning practice generally involves citizens at different stages of plan-making with a clear purpose of securing a consensus aimed at legitimizing the policy content of a development plan. This book contests and challenges this consensus-oriented view of citizen participation in planning, arguing against the assertion that cities can be represented by a single public interest, for which consensus is sought by planners and policy makers. As such, it replaces consensus-centered rational planning models with Foucauldian and Lacanian models of planning to show that planning is riddled with a variety of spatial conflicts, most of which are resolvable. The book does not downplay differences of class and social and cultural identities of various kinds built on arbitrarily assumed public interest created erroneously by further assuming that the professionally trained planner is unbiased. It moves from theory to practice through case studies, which widens and deepens opportunities for public participation as new arenas beyond the processes of preparation of development plans are highlighted. The book also argues that spaces of public participation in planning are shrinking. For example, city development plans promoted under the erstwhile JNNUM programme and several other neoliberal policy regime initiatives have reduced the quality, as well as the extent of participatory practices in planning. The end result of this is that legally mandated participatory spaces are being used by powerful interests to pursue the neoliberal agenda. The volume is divided into three main parts. The first part deals with the theory and history of public participation and governance in planning in India, and the second presents real-life case studies related to planning at a regional level in order to describe and empirically explore some of the theoretical arguments made in the first. The third section provides analyses of selected case studies at a local level. An introduction and conclusions, along with insights for the future, provide a coherent envelope to the book.

This book provides a state of the art approach to participatory planning, and generates innovative thought in planning theory and knowledge study. The book introduces a new conceptual framework for participatory planning, one which redefines concepts that have been taken for granted for too long: those of “public participation” and “local knowledge”. It draws on the rich repertoire of public participation practices that have developed globally over the last 50 years, and investigates the following questions: Which participatory practices most effectively capture residents’ genuine spatial needs, perceptions and desires? And how can these be incorporated into actual plans? The book is based on an empirical comparative examination of the effectiveness of various participatory processes, and proposes practical solutions for public participation through two new instruments: the Practices Evaluation Tool, and the Participatory Methods Ladder. These instruments calibrate participation methods according to certain criteria, in order to improve their ability to extract local knowledge and incorporate it into planning deliverables. These new instruments correspond to and elaborate on Arnstein’s ladder - the 1969 theoretical landmark for participatory planning. Both academics and practitioners in the area of urban and regional planning will find this book to be an invaluable resource, given the way it develops both theoretical and practical cutting-edge outcomes.

This book compares public participation in a selection of European counties. Using the UK, France, and Sweden as examples of alternative approaches to urban planning, the author examines public participation both at the planning and development control stages.