How to combine descriptive and normative approaches in participatory urban planning: an experimental mixed-method implemented in the downtown district of Poznań, Poland

IF 0.6 Q3 GEOGRAPHY
B. Kaźmierczak, S. Palicki
{"title":"How to combine descriptive and normative approaches in participatory urban planning: an experimental mixed-method implemented in the downtown district of Poznań, Poland","authors":"B. Kaźmierczak, S. Palicki","doi":"10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article presents a tool for reaching consensus in the participatory planning of the conversion and renovation of an urban space. It is based on the main assumption of combining descriptive and normative approaches in the actions of experts. It is an innovative way to strengthen the possibility of expert assessment in the decision-making process concerning desired spatial transformations. The authors hereof resorted to their own long-term experience when elaborating a tool that can easily support the selection of the optimal solution for maximizing benefits and minimizing outlay. The issues presented herein refer to the Central European context, which is characterized by a low level of social trust and by contentiousness in making joint decisions. The tool presented herein can contribute to participatory planning practice by enabling an expert to select solutions that meet the highest efficiency criteria on more objective grounds. It can be used to identify the convergent expectations of various social groups, thus facilitating conflict mitigation and arrival at a consensus. As a result, it can underlie the process of building social trust.","PeriodicalId":44469,"journal":{"name":"Miscellanea Geographica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Miscellanea Geographica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract This article presents a tool for reaching consensus in the participatory planning of the conversion and renovation of an urban space. It is based on the main assumption of combining descriptive and normative approaches in the actions of experts. It is an innovative way to strengthen the possibility of expert assessment in the decision-making process concerning desired spatial transformations. The authors hereof resorted to their own long-term experience when elaborating a tool that can easily support the selection of the optimal solution for maximizing benefits and minimizing outlay. The issues presented herein refer to the Central European context, which is characterized by a low level of social trust and by contentiousness in making joint decisions. The tool presented herein can contribute to participatory planning practice by enabling an expert to select solutions that meet the highest efficiency criteria on more objective grounds. It can be used to identify the convergent expectations of various social groups, thus facilitating conflict mitigation and arrival at a consensus. As a result, it can underlie the process of building social trust.
如何在参与式城市规划中结合描述性和规范性方法:在波兰波兹纳斯市中心实施的实验性混合方法
本文提出了一种工具,用于在城市空间转换和改造的参与式规划中达成共识。它是基于在专家的行动中结合描述性和规范性方法的主要假设。这是一种创新的方式,可以加强在有关期望的空间转换的决策过程中进行专家评估的可能性。本文的作者根据自己的长期经验,精心设计了一个工具,可以很容易地支持选择最优解决方案,以实现收益最大化和支出最小化。这里提出的问题涉及中欧的情况,其特点是社会信任水平低,在作出共同决定时存在争议。本文提出的工具有助于参与式规划实践,使专家能够在更客观的基础上选择符合最高效率标准的解决方案。它可以用来确定不同社会群体的共同期望,从而促进缓解冲突和达成共识。因此,它可以成为建立社会信任过程的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信