Approaches to Democratic Involvement: Widening Community Engagement in the English Planning System

Abstract

Participation has become integral to the delivery of public services, as governments attempt to involve citizens in decision making through processes of consultation and engagement. This paper addresses the issue of community participation in the context of the English planning system, which has recently been restructured to focus more sharply on integrating communities in the planning process. It presents findings of research into the workings of the reformed planning system, in particular in relation to the objective of public participation, using the case of the Planning Aid service. The paper sets the discussion in the context of two different forms of democracy (representative and deliberative democracy) and associated strategies for participation. It then outlines the recent reforms in the planning system, highlighting the different approaches to participation that are being applied. The paper then examines the case of Planning Aid, a service that aims to involve disadvantaged groups in the planning system. The paper concludes that the outcomes from recent experiences of participation in planning are in part due to the “hybrid” approaches that are emerging within the system. While this provides the potential for more inclusive planning, it is argued that this “hybridity” needs to be acknowledged by policy makers and practitioners if strategies and mechanisms are to be put in place that respond to the demands of different forms of democracy.

Keywords:

• Community engagement
• participation
• forms of democracy
• Planning Aid

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Planning Aid for their permission to publish this paper. However, the article reflects the views of the authors alone rather than those of Planning Aid or the Royal Town Planning Institute. For more information on Planning Aid, see www. planningaid.rtpi.org.uk

Notes

1. The Skeffington Report advocated involvement of the public in planning decisions in 1969 (MHLG, 1969).

2. This included an analysis of monitoring returns from the regional services and feedback forms from individuals and community groups using the service, as well as interviews with Planning Aid staff, national and regional stakeholders, and staff from the Ministry responsible for planning matters (the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister—ODPM, now renamed Communities and Local Government—CLG).

3. The management of Planning Aid transferred from TCPA to the RTPI in the 1990s.

4. “Disadvantaged groups” are defined by the Royal Town Planning Institute as “people on low incomes; unemployed people; minority ethnic communities; women and women's groups, disabled people and disability groups; older people; children and young people; tenants groups; community groups and voluntary organisations” (RTPI, 2003, p. 6).

5. The monitoring figures refer to Planning Aid's core funded work, rather than its regional projects, that are funded separately on an ad hoc basis, in response to sponsors' requests within the regions.

6. The gap between the cost of living and planners' wages has been cited as a reason for staff shortages within Local Planning Authorities, as well as the strong competition from private sector planning consultancies (Doak & Parker, 2005)

7. This is the Semi-Judicial Agency charged with reviewing local authority planning decisions.