Social participation in the city management: between social exclusion and involvement
Jacek Kotus
Abstract
Contemporary urban planning in so-called „Western” countries is carried out according to the participatory paradigm. In this case the residents of the area are active, conscious and educated subjects in the process of planning and space management. It can be argued that planning in Poland and space management on the local level – cities and municipalities – are still carried out with social exclusion. In practice, they are often implemented on the principle of „fighting fires that have already occurred”. Also, the structure of the city offces and planning companies must be considered, as it is mostly out-dated in comparison with modern planning and urban standards. In general, such structure excludes all residents in the process of the area planning. This paper adapts as its starting point the concept of Arnstein’s „participatory ladder” and discusses the place of Poznań on that ladder, leading to analysis from the perspective of the actions undertaken by the city authorities.
Keywords:
social participation, city management, cityReferences
Arnstein S.R., 1969, A ladder of Citizen participation, „Journal of the American Institute of Planners” 35(4), s. 216-224.
Creighton J.L., 2012, The public participation handbook, Wiley, San Francisco.
Davies S.R., Selin C., Gano G., Pereira A.G., 2012, Citizen engagement and urban change: Three case studies of materiał deliberation, „Cities” 29(6), 351-357.
Forester J., 1999, The deliberativepractitioner: Encouragingparticipatoryplanningprocesses, The MIT Press, Cambridge.
Forester J„ 2009, Dealing with differences: Dramas of mediating public disputes, Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Healey P., 2003, Collaborative planning in perspective, „Planning Theory” 2(2), s. 101-123.
Innes J.E., 1997, Theplanners’ century, „Journal of Planning Education and Research” 16(3), s. 227-228.
Innes J.E., 1998, Information in communicative planning, „Journal of the American Planning Association” 64(1), s. 52-63.
Johnson B.J., 2012, TV, boon or bane? Participation and a televised town meeting, „Planning Theory & Practice” 13(2), s. 275-293.
McKinney M.J., 2001, What do we mean by consensus? Some definingprinciples, [w:] Across the Great Divide: Explorations in Collaborative Conservation and the American West, ed. P. Brick, D. Snów, S. Van de Wetering, Island Press, Washington, s. 33-41.
Thomas R., 2006, Taking democracy to scalę: Toolsfor planning at the speed of change, [w:] Urban sprawi: A comprehensive reference guide, ed. D.C. Soule, Greenwood Press, Westport, s. 289-334.
http://bip.poznan.pl/bip/struktura-organizacyjna-miasta-poznania,doc,293/ (dostęp 23 września 2012).
http://forum.um.poznan.pl/mvnforum/mvnforum/index (dostęp 24 lutego 2013).
http://www.my-poznaniacy.org/ (dostęp 23 września 2012).
www.poznan.pl (dostęp 12 stycznia 2013).
