Arguments in favour of participative democratic practices have been promoted stridently in recent years as trust in existing political institutions has receded. These arguments assume the declining ability of elected members to represent increasingly diverse constituencies in a period of rapid change, and a sense of powerlessness among citizens in the face of distant economic and political forces. There have been few attempts to review the available empirical evidence on whether deliberative and inclusionary processes lead to ‘better’ decisions. For the United Kingdom, evidence is limited, except in the land-use planning field, and we argue that in present circumstances their primary role should be to stimulate wider civil engagement as a means of restoring trust. ‘Better’ decisions will then follow. However, barriers to their acceptance remain, not least in the need to create sufficient incentive for citizens to participate and in the requirement that established economic and political interests devote sufficient resources for them to be effective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArnsteinS, 1969, “A ladder of citizen participation”Journal of the American Institute of Planners35216–224
2.
BeckU, 1994, “The reinvention of politics: Towards a theory of reflexive modernisation”, in Reflexive Modernisation: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order Eds BeckUGiddensALashS (Polity Press, Cambridge) pp 1–55
3.
BeethamD, 1995, “What future for social and economic rights?”, special issue Political Studies4341–60
4.
BohmanJRehgW, 1997, “Introduction”, in Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics Eds BohmanJRehgW, (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp ix – xxx
5.
BrysonJ MCrosbyB C, 1993, “Policy planning and the design and use of forums, arenas, and courts”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design20175–194
6.
CarterNDarlowA, 1997, “Local Agenda 21 and developers: Are we better equipped to build a consensus in the 1990s?”Planning Practice and Research1245–57
7.
CartwrightL, 1997, “The implementation of sustainable development by local authorities in the South East of England”Planning Practice and Research12337–347
8.
CoenanF HHuitemaDO'TooleL J (Eds), 1998Participation and the Quality of Environmental Decision Making (Kluwer, London)
9.
CowellRMurdochJ, 1999, “Land use and the limits to (regional) governance: Some lessons from planning for housing and minerals in England”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research23654–669
10.
DahlR, 1982Dilemmas of Pluralistic Democracy (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT)
11.
DavisHSkelcherCClarkeMTaylorMYoungKRaoNStokerG (Eds), 1997New Perspectives on Local Governance: Reviewing the Research Evidence (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York)
12.
DavoudiSHealeyPHullA, 1997, “Rhetoric and reality in British structure planning in Lancashire, 1993 – 1995”, in Managing Cities Eds HealeyPCameronSDavoudiSGrahamSMadanipourA (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex) pp 153–172
13.
DETR, 1998, “Guidance on enhancing public participation in local government”, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU
14.
DETR, 1999A Better Quality of Life: Strategy for Sustainable Development in the United Kingdom Cm 4345, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (The Stationery Office, London)
15.
DryzekJ, 1990Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy and Political Science (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
16.
EckersleyR, 1996, “Liberal democracy and the rights of nature: The struggle for inclusion”, in Ecology and Democracy Ed. MathewsF (Frank Cass, London) pp 169–198
17.
EstlundD, 1997, “Beyond fairness and deliberation: The epistemic dimension of democratic authority”, in Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics Eds BohmanJRehgW (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 173–204
18.
EtzioniA, 1993The Spirit of Community: Rights, Responsibilities and the Communitarian Agenda (Crown, New York)
19.
FishkinJ S, 1991Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform (Yale University Press, London)
20.
ForesterJ, 1989Planning in the Face of Power (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
21.
GiddensA, 1991Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age (Polity Press, Cambridge)
22.
GiddensA, 1998The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy (Polity Press, Cambridge)
23.
GoodwinP, 1998, “‘Hired hands’ or ‘local voice’: Understandings and experience of local participation in conservation”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series23481–499
24.
HabermasJ, 1984The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society translated by McCarthyT (Heinemann, London)
25.
HabermasJ, 1987The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume 2: A Critique of Functionalist Reason translated by McCarthyT (Polity Press, Cambridge)
26.
HabermasJ, 1996, “Popular sovereignty as procedure”, in Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy Ed. HabermasJ, (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 463–490
27.
HajerMKesselringS, 1999, “Democracy in risk society? Learning from the new politics of mobility in Munich”Environmental Politics8(3) 1–23
28.
HanfKJansenA-I (Eds), 1998Governance and Environment in Western Europe: Politics, Policy and Administration (Longman, Harlow, Essex)
29.
HargreavesIChristieI (Eds), 1998Tomorrow's Politics: The Third Way and Beyond (Demos, London)
30.
HastingsA, 1996, “Unravelling the process of ‘partnership’ in urban regeneration policy”Urban Studies33253–268
31.
HealeyP, 1992, “Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory”Town Planning Review63143–162
HealeyP, 1998a, “Building institutional capacity through collaborative approaches to urban planning”Environment and Planning A301531–1546
34.
HealeyP, 1998b, “Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society”Town Planning Review691–21
35.
HirstP, 1994Associative Democracy: New Forms of Economic and Social Governance (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
36.
HogwoodB W, 1997, “The meaning of government”Political Studies45704–715
37.
InnesJ E, 1996, “Planning through consensus-building: A New view of the comprehensive planning ideal”Journal of the American Planning Association62460–472
38.
InnesJ E, 1998, “Information in communicative planning”Journal of the American Planning Association6452–63
39.
InnesJ EBooherD E, 1999, “Consensus building as role playing and bricolage: Towards a theory of consensus planning”Journal of the American Planning Association659–26
40.
KearnsA J, 1992, “Active citizenship and urban governance”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series1720–34
41.
KrebsA, 1997, “Discourse ethics and nature”Environmental Values6269–279
42.
LawsD, 1996, “The practice of fairness”Environmental Impact Assessment Review1665–70
43.
MathewsF, 1996, “Community and the ecological self”, in Ecology and Democracy Ed. MathewsF (Frank Cass, London) pp 66–100
44.
MHLG, 1969People and Planning Report of the Committee on Public Participation in Planning, Chairman A M Skeffington, Ministry of Housing and Local Government (HMSO, London)
45.
MillerB, 1992, “Collective action and rational choice: Place, community and the limits to individual self-interest”Economic Geography6822–42
46.
MillerD, 1995, “Citizenship and pluralism”Political Studies43432–450
47.
MooteM AMcClarenM PChickeringD K, 1997, “Theory in practice: Applying participatory democracy theory to public land planning”Environmental Management21877–889
48.
MurdochJAbramS, 1998, “Defining the limits of community governance”Journal of Rural Studies1441–50
49.
MyersonGRydinY, 1994, “‘Environment’ and planning: A Tale of the mundane and the sublime”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space12437–452
50.
O'HaraS, 1996, “Discursive ethics in ecosystem valuation and environmental policy”Ecological Economics1695–107
51.
OlsonM, 1965The Logic of Collective Action (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
52.
PainterC, 1994, “Public service reform: Reinventing or abandoning government?”Political Quarterly65242–262
53.
ParkerG, 1999, “The role of the consumer-citizen in environmental protest in the 1990s”Space and Polity367–83
54.
ParkerJ, 1995, “Enabling morally reflective communities: Towards a resolution of the democratic dilemma of environmental values in policy”, in Values and the Environment: A Social Science Perspective Eds GuerrierYAlexanderNChaseJO'BrienM (John Wiley, Chichester) pp 33–50
55.
PattersonAPinchP L, 1995, “‘Hollowing out’ the local state: Compulsory competitive tendering and the restructuring of British public sector services”Environment and Planning A271437–1461
56.
PenningtonMRydinY, 1999, “Public perception and local environment planning: the collective action problem and the potential of ‘social capital’”, paper presented at the annual meeting of the RGS/IBG, Leicester, January
57.
PettsJ, 1995, “Waste management strategy development: A Case study of community involvement and consensus-building in Hampshire”Journal of Environmental Planning and Management38519–536
58.
PhelpsN ATewdwr-JonesM, 1999“Discourse and distortion in collaborative and associative governance”, paper presented to the Discourse and Policy Change conference, Department of Urban Studies, University of Glasgow, February; copy available from Dr Phelps, Department of City and Regional Planning, University of Wales, Cardiff
59.
RennOWeblerTRakelHDienelPJohnsonB, 1993, “Public participation in decisionmaking: A Three-step procedure”Policy Sciences26189–214
60.
RhodesR A W, 1997Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability (Open University Press, Milton Keynes)
61.
RoseN, 1993, “Government, authority and expertise in advanced liberalism”Economy and Society22283–299
62.
RoseN, 1996, “The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government”Economy and Society25327–356
63.
RydinY, 1998, “The enabling local state and urban development: Resources, rhetoric and planning in East London”Urban Studies35175–191
64.
RydinY, 1999, “Public participation in planning”, in British Planning Policy: 50 Years of Regional and Urban Change Ed. CullingworthJ B (Athlone Press, London) pp 184–197
65.
SimmieJ (Ed.), 1994Planning London (UCL Press, London)
66.
SkillingtonT, 1997, “Politics and the struggle to define: A Discourse analysis of the framing strategies of competing actors in a ‘new’ participatory forum”British Journal of Sociology48493–513
67.
SmithD MBlancM, 1997, “Grass-roots democracy and participation: A New analytical and practical approach”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space15281–303
68.
StensonKWattP, 1999, “Governmentality and the ‘death of the social’? A discourse analysis of local government texts in South-East England”Urban Studies36189–201
69.
StewartJ, 1995, “Innovation in democratic practice”, INLOGOV, University of Birmingham, Birmingham
70.
StokerG, 1997, “Local political participation”, in New Perspectives on Local Governance Eds DavisHSkelcherCClarkeMTaylorMYoungKRaoNStokerG (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York) pp 157–196
71.
SzreterS, 1999, “A new political economy for New Labour: The importance of social capital”Renewal730–44
72.
Tewdwr-JonesMAllmendingerP, 1998, “Deconstructing communicative rationality: A Critique of Habermasian collaborative planning”Environment and Planning A301975–1989
73.
Tewdwr-JonesMThomasH, 1998, “Collaborative action in local plan-making: Planners' perceptions of ‘planning through debate’”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design25127–144
74.
ThomasH, 1996, “Public participation in planning”, in British Planning Policy in Transition: Planning in the 1990s Ed. Tewdwr-JonesM (UCL Press, London) pp 168–188
75.
Town and Country Planning Act, 1947Public General Acts—George VI chapter 51 (HMSO, London)
76.
WeblerT, 1995, “‘Right’ discourse in citizen participation: An evaluative yardstick”, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse Eds RennOWeblerTWiedemannP (Kluwer, London) pp 35–86
77.
WilkinsonDApplebeeE, 1999Implementing Holistic Government: Joined-up Action on the Ground (Policy Press, Bristol)
78.
WilsonP A, 1997, “Building social capital: A Learning agenda for the twenty-first century”Urban Studies34745–760
79.
YoungI M, 1997, “Difference as a resource for democratic communication”, in Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics Eds BohmanJRehgW (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 383–406
80.
YoungKRaoN, 1997, “Public attitudes to local government”, in New Perspectives on Local Governance Eds DavisHSkelcherCClarkeMTaylorMYoungKRaoNStokerG (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York) pp 118–156
