Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Åström, Joachim
Data de Publicação: 2020
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i2.3021
Resumo: Based on the critical stance of citizens towards urban planning, growing attention has been directed towards new forms of citizen participation. A key expectation is that advanced digital technologies will reconnect citizens and decision makers and enhance trust in planning. However, empirical evidence suggests participation by itself does not foster trust, and many scholars refer to a general weakness of these initiatives to deliver the expected outcomes. Considering that trust is reciprocal, this article will switch focus and concentrate on planners’ attitudes towards citizens. Do urban planners generally think that citizens are trustworthy? Even though studies show that public officials are more trusting than people in general, it is possible that they do not trust citizens when interacting with government. However, empirical evidence is scarce. While there is plenty of research on citizens’ trust in government, public officials trust in citizens has received little scholarly attention. To address this gap, we will draw on a survey targeted to a representative sample of public managers in Swedish local government (N = 1430). First, urban planners will be compared with other public officials when it comes to their level of trust toward citizens’ ability, integrity and benevolence. In order to understand variations in trust, a set of institutional factors will thereafter be tested, along with more commonly used individual factors. In light of the empirical findings, the final section of the article returns to the idea of e-participation as a trust-building strategy. What would make planners trust the citizens in participatory urban planning?
id RCAP_e79bb926fc181b334aa08a3cc206b902
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3021
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?citizen participation; e-participation; new urban agenda; planning practice; smart cities; trust in planning; urban plannersBased on the critical stance of citizens towards urban planning, growing attention has been directed towards new forms of citizen participation. A key expectation is that advanced digital technologies will reconnect citizens and decision makers and enhance trust in planning. However, empirical evidence suggests participation by itself does not foster trust, and many scholars refer to a general weakness of these initiatives to deliver the expected outcomes. Considering that trust is reciprocal, this article will switch focus and concentrate on planners’ attitudes towards citizens. Do urban planners generally think that citizens are trustworthy? Even though studies show that public officials are more trusting than people in general, it is possible that they do not trust citizens when interacting with government. However, empirical evidence is scarce. While there is plenty of research on citizens’ trust in government, public officials trust in citizens has received little scholarly attention. To address this gap, we will draw on a survey targeted to a representative sample of public managers in Swedish local government (N = 1430). First, urban planners will be compared with other public officials when it comes to their level of trust toward citizens’ ability, integrity and benevolence. In order to understand variations in trust, a set of institutional factors will thereafter be tested, along with more commonly used individual factors. In light of the empirical findings, the final section of the article returns to the idea of e-participation as a trust-building strategy. What would make planners trust the citizens in participatory urban planning?Cogitatio2020-06-26info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i2.3021oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3021Urban Planning; Vol 5, No 2 (2020): Visual Communication in Urban Design and Planning: The Impact of Mediatisation(s) on the Construction of Urban Futures; 84-932183-7635reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/3021https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i2.3021https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/3021/3021Copyright (c) 2020 Joachim Åströmhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessÅström, Joachim2022-12-20T11:00:10Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3021Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:22:06.547757Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
title Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
spellingShingle Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
Åström, Joachim
citizen participation; e-participation; new urban agenda; planning practice; smart cities; trust in planning; urban planners
title_short Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
title_full Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
title_fullStr Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
title_full_unstemmed Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
title_sort Participatory Urban Planning: What Would Make Planners Trust the Citizens?
author Åström, Joachim
author_facet Åström, Joachim
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Åström, Joachim
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv citizen participation; e-participation; new urban agenda; planning practice; smart cities; trust in planning; urban planners
topic citizen participation; e-participation; new urban agenda; planning practice; smart cities; trust in planning; urban planners
description Based on the critical stance of citizens towards urban planning, growing attention has been directed towards new forms of citizen participation. A key expectation is that advanced digital technologies will reconnect citizens and decision makers and enhance trust in planning. However, empirical evidence suggests participation by itself does not foster trust, and many scholars refer to a general weakness of these initiatives to deliver the expected outcomes. Considering that trust is reciprocal, this article will switch focus and concentrate on planners’ attitudes towards citizens. Do urban planners generally think that citizens are trustworthy? Even though studies show that public officials are more trusting than people in general, it is possible that they do not trust citizens when interacting with government. However, empirical evidence is scarce. While there is plenty of research on citizens’ trust in government, public officials trust in citizens has received little scholarly attention. To address this gap, we will draw on a survey targeted to a representative sample of public managers in Swedish local government (N = 1430). First, urban planners will be compared with other public officials when it comes to their level of trust toward citizens’ ability, integrity and benevolence. In order to understand variations in trust, a set of institutional factors will thereafter be tested, along with more commonly used individual factors. In light of the empirical findings, the final section of the article returns to the idea of e-participation as a trust-building strategy. What would make planners trust the citizens in participatory urban planning?
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-06-26
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i2.3021
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3021
url https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i2.3021
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3021
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/3021
https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i2.3021
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/3021/3021
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Joachim Åström
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Joachim Åström
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Urban Planning; Vol 5, No 2 (2020): Visual Communication in Urban Design and Planning: The Impact of Mediatisation(s) on the Construction of Urban Futures; 84-93
2183-7635
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130667282333696