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

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Åström, Joachim
Publication Date: 2020
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i2.3021
Summary: 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 Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/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:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron: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 Åströminfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessÅström, Joachim2022-12-20T11:00:10Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/3021Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T10:44:19.638762Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
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
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Joachim Åström
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:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833591184483680256