The present paper examines whether the potential advantages of the expanding practice of web-based public participation only complement the benefits of the traditional techniques, or whether they are empowering enough to replace them. The question is examined in a real-world case of neighborhood revitalization, in which both techniques were practiced simultaneously. Comparisons are made at four major planning junctions, in order to study the contributions of each technique to the qualities of involvement, trust, and empowerment. The results show that web-based participants not only differ from the participation of traditional practices, but they also differ from each other on the basis of their type of web participation. The results indicate that web-based participation is an effective complementary means of public participation, but it cannot replace the traditional unmediated techniques.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarkiHHartwickJ, 1989, “Rethinking the concept of user involvement”Management Information Systems Quarterly1353–63
2.
BarkiHHartwickJ, 1994, “Rethinking the concept of user involvement, and user attitude”Management Information Systems Quarterly1824–59
3.
BeierleC YKosinskyM D, 2000, “Values, conflict, and trust in participatory environmental planning”Journal of Policy Analysis and Management19587–602
4.
BerryJ, 2004, “2D interface to a 3D environment, a proof-of-concept: Coupling two software applications for a web-based public participation GIS”, MSc thesis, Department of Geomatic Engineering, University College London
5.
BrabhamD C, 2009, “Crowdsourcing the citizen participation process for public planning projects”Planning Theory forthcoming, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1123325
6.
BrandtM, 2002, “A model for evaluating public participation GIS”, in Community Participation and Geographic Information systems Eds CraigWHarrisTWeinerD (Taylor and Francis, London) pp 346–365
7.
BrodyS DGodschalkD RBurbyR J, 2003, “Mandating citizen participation in plan making: Six strategies planning choices”Journal of the American Planning Association46245–264
8.
BurbyR J, 2003, “Making plans that matter: Citizens involvement and government action”Journal of the American Planning Association6917–33
9.
CarverS, 2001, “Public participation using web-based GIS”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28803–804
10.
ChamberlineJ, 1997, “A working definition of empowerment”Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal204–43
11.
ChurchmanASadanE, 2003Participation: Your Way to Make a Difference (Hakibbutz Hameuchad, Tel Aviv), in Hebrew
12.
CraigWHarrisTWeinerD, (Eds), 2002Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems (Taylor and Francis, London)
13.
DunnE C, 2007, “Participatory GIS—a people's GIS?”Progress in Human Geography31616–637
14.
ElwoodA S, 2001, “GIS use in community planning: A multidimensional analysis of empowerment”Environment and Planning A34905–922
15.
ForesterJ, 1998, “Creating public value in planning and urban design: The three abiding problems of negotiation, participation and deliberation”Urban Design International35–12
HalvorsenK E, 2003, “Assessing the effects of public participation”Public Administration Review63535–543
18.
HamiltonAZhangXFernandoTWatsonK, 2001, “Learning through visual systems to enhance the urban planning process”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28833–845
19.
HanS SPengZ, 2003, “Public participation GIS (PPGIS) for town council management in Singapore”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design3089–111
20.
IrvinR AStansburyJ, 2004, “Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort?”Public Administration Review6455–65
21.
JeffriesA, 1996, “Modeling community work: Analytic framework for practice”, in Community Practice: Conceptual Models Ed. WeilM (Haworth Press, New York) pp 101–125
22.
KingS CFelteyM KSuselO B, 1998, “The question of participation: Towards authentic public participation in public administration”Public Administration Review58317–327
23.
KingstonRCarverSEvansATurtonI, 2000, “Web-based public participation geographical information systems: An aid to local environmental decision-making”Computers, Environment and Urban Systems24109–125
24.
KingstonRCarverSEvansATurtonI, 2001, “Public participation, GIS and cyberdemocracy: Evaluating on-line spatial decision support systems”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28907–921
25.
LaneB M, 2005, “Public participation in planning: An intellectual history”Australian Geographer36283–299
26.
PengZ-R, 2001, “Internet GIS for public participation”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28889–905
27.
RappaportJ, 1984, “Studies in empowerment: Introduction to the issue”Prevention in Human Services31–7
28.
RochaM E, 1997, “A ladder of empowerment”Journal of Planning and Research1731–44
29.
SarjakoskiT, 1998, “Networked GIS for public participation and GIS on utilizing image data”Computer Environment and Urban Systems22381–392
SchroederP CBoudreauP RBoyceM ABrehmeC W EEvansA JRahmaniA, 2001, “The Gulf of Maine Environmental Information Exchange: Participation, observation, conservation”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28865–887
32.
SieberR, 2006, “Public participation geographic information systems: A literature review and framework”Annals of the American Association of Geography96491–507
33.
SternE, 2002, “Planning hierarchy and public participation in Israel”Perspective1438–42 (in Hebrew)
34.
SternEAmirI, 2006, “Benefits of public participation as evaluated by the participating citizens”, paper presented at the Annual Conference of Israel Planning Association, Hertzelia (in Hebrew), available from the authors
35.
TalmorK, 2006, “Evaluating a web-based public participation system in the planning process—a case study”, MSc thesis, Technion—Israeli Institute of Technology, Haifa (in Hebrew)
36.
TrevorH, 1998, “Empowerment marginalization and ‘community-integrated’ GIS”Cartography and Geographic Information Systems2567–76
37.
WeblerTTukerSKruegeR, 2004, “What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public”Environment Management27435–450
38.
WondolleckJ MYaffeeS L, 2000Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management (Island Press, Washington, DC)
39.
ZimmermanM, 1990, “Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between individual and psychological conceptions”American Journal of Community Psychology18169–177
40.
ZimmermanMRappaportJ, 1988, “Citizen participation, perceived control and psychological empowerment”American Journal of Community Psychology16725–750
