“共享语言”还是“Straitjacket”？通过标准化框架使参与合法化的隐性成本

IF 3.4 2区经济学 Q1 REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING

Planning Theory & Practice Pub Date : 2023-05-24 DOI:10.1080/14649357.2023.2214530

C. Legacy, J. Barry, Matt Novacevski, Morgan Boyco

{"title":"“共享语言”还是“Straitjacket”？通过标准化框架使参与合法化的隐性成本","authors":"C. Legacy, J. Barry, Matt Novacevski, Morgan Boyco","doi":"10.1080/14649357.2023.2214530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, we examine how a framework developed by the International Association for Public Participation is used to frame and legitimise the participatory practices of local governments in Ontario, Canada and Victoria, Australia. We find the association of IAP2 materials with appeals to “best practice” raises questions about the potential consequences of the use of standardised frameworks for participation. While these frameworks encourage a minimum standard for public participation, they may also stifle creative and contextually sensitive participatory planning practice.","PeriodicalId":47693,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory & Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Shared Language” Or “Straitjacket”? The Hidden Costs of Legitimising Participation Through Standardised Frameworks\",\"authors\":\"C. Legacy, J. Barry, Matt Novacevski, Morgan Boyco\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14649357.2023.2214530\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this paper, we examine how a framework developed by the International Association for Public Participation is used to frame and legitimise the participatory practices of local governments in Ontario, Canada and Victoria, Australia. We find the association of IAP2 materials with appeals to “best practice” raises questions about the potential consequences of the use of standardised frameworks for participation. While these frameworks encourage a minimum standard for public participation, they may also stifle creative and contextually sensitive participatory planning practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Planning Theory & Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Planning Theory & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2023.2214530\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Planning Theory & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2023.2214530","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要在本文中，我们研究了国际公众参与协会制定的框架是如何用于构建加拿大安大略省和澳大利亚维多利亚州地方政府的参与实践并使其合法化的。我们发现，IAP2材料与呼吁“最佳实践”的联系引发了人们对使用标准化参与框架的潜在后果的质疑。虽然这些框架鼓励公众参与的最低标准，但它们也可能扼杀创造性和对环境敏感的参与性规划实践。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

“Shared Language” Or “Straitjacket”? The Hidden Costs of Legitimising Participation Through Standardised Frameworks

Abstract In this paper, we examine how a framework developed by the International Association for Public Participation is used to frame and legitimise the participatory practices of local governments in Ontario, Canada and Victoria, Australia. We find the association of IAP2 materials with appeals to “best practice” raises questions about the potential consequences of the use of standardised frameworks for participation. While these frameworks encourage a minimum standard for public participation, they may also stifle creative and contextually sensitive participatory planning practice.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Planning Theory & Practice Multiple-

CiteScore

5.40

自引率

5.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Planning Theory & Practice provides an international focus for the development of theory and practice in spatial planning and a forum to promote the policy dimensions of space and place. Published four times a year in conjunction with the Royal Town Planning Institute, London, it publishes original articles and review papers from both academics and practitioners with the aim of encouraging more effective, two-way communication between theory and practice. The Editors invite robustly researched papers which raise issues at the leading edge of planning theory and practice, and welcome papers on controversial subjects. Contributors in the early stages of their academic careers are encouraged, as are rejoinders to items previously published.