城市重建中的参与式预算:界定正式和非正式公民活动之间的差距

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Alisa Koroļova, S. Treija
{"title":"城市重建中的参与式预算:界定正式和非正式公民活动之间的差距","authors":"Alisa Koroļova, S. Treija","doi":"10.2478/aup-2019-0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Urban regeneration has been an ongoing process in many cities for decades. It has experienced various changes in terms of the main driving force, with public engagement becoming more and more important. One of the ways for communities to get involved in urban transformation is through participation in urban planning. Local communities are considered as partners in urban design processes, and in many countries their role in planning and design is defined by industry regulations. Still, one question is important – is public participation a formal tool or does it have an influence on planning and how it impacts decision making. Along with community involvement in planning processes, participatory budgeting has been developed as a public participatory approach in recent years. This gives a chance for inhabitants to participate in the budgetary decision-making process. The aim of this study is to analyse whether participatory budgeting, which is mainly municipal-led urban activism, answers the real needs of inhabitants in terms of urban regeneration. The interests of formal urban activism are defined and compared to the interests of informal urban activism actions, correlation and gaps are defined.","PeriodicalId":36267,"journal":{"name":"Architecture and Urban Planning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Participatory Budgeting in Urban Regeneration: Defining the Gap Between Formal and Informal Citizen Activism\",\"authors\":\"Alisa Koroļova, S. Treija\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/aup-2019-0018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Urban regeneration has been an ongoing process in many cities for decades. It has experienced various changes in terms of the main driving force, with public engagement becoming more and more important. One of the ways for communities to get involved in urban transformation is through participation in urban planning. Local communities are considered as partners in urban design processes, and in many countries their role in planning and design is defined by industry regulations. Still, one question is important – is public participation a formal tool or does it have an influence on planning and how it impacts decision making. Along with community involvement in planning processes, participatory budgeting has been developed as a public participatory approach in recent years. This gives a chance for inhabitants to participate in the budgetary decision-making process. The aim of this study is to analyse whether participatory budgeting, which is mainly municipal-led urban activism, answers the real needs of inhabitants in terms of urban regeneration. The interests of formal urban activism are defined and compared to the interests of informal urban activism actions, correlation and gaps are defined.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Architecture and Urban Planning\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Architecture and Urban Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2019-0018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Architecture and Urban Planning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2019-0018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要几十年来,城市更新一直是许多城市的一个持续过程。它在主要驱动力方面经历了各种变化,公众参与变得越来越重要。社区参与城市转型的方式之一是参与城市规划。当地社区被视为城市设计过程中的合作伙伴,在许多国家,他们在规划和设计中的作用由行业法规定义。然而,有一个问题很重要——公众参与是一种正式的工具,还是对规划以及如何影响决策产生影响。近年来,随着社区参与规划进程,参与式预算编制已发展成为一种公众参与的方法。这使居民有机会参与预算决策过程。本研究的目的是分析参与式预算,主要是由市政主导的城市行动主义,是否满足了居民在城市复兴方面的真正需求。定义了正式城市行动主义的利益,并与非正式城市行动主义行动的利益进行了比较,定义了相关性和差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Participatory Budgeting in Urban Regeneration: Defining the Gap Between Formal and Informal Citizen Activism
Abstract Urban regeneration has been an ongoing process in many cities for decades. It has experienced various changes in terms of the main driving force, with public engagement becoming more and more important. One of the ways for communities to get involved in urban transformation is through participation in urban planning. Local communities are considered as partners in urban design processes, and in many countries their role in planning and design is defined by industry regulations. Still, one question is important – is public participation a formal tool or does it have an influence on planning and how it impacts decision making. Along with community involvement in planning processes, participatory budgeting has been developed as a public participatory approach in recent years. This gives a chance for inhabitants to participate in the budgetary decision-making process. The aim of this study is to analyse whether participatory budgeting, which is mainly municipal-led urban activism, answers the real needs of inhabitants in terms of urban regeneration. The interests of formal urban activism are defined and compared to the interests of informal urban activism actions, correlation and gaps are defined.
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
Architecture and Urban Planning
Architecture and Urban Planning Arts and Humanities-Conservation
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
×
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