THE MYTH OF PARTICIPATION

UURBANISM

SPS

SpatialPlann

ing&

StrategyTU

Delft

THE DOWNSIDE OF PARTICIPATION

CRITICS OF PARTICIPATION SAY IT’S…

‣ EXPENSIVE

‣ TIME CONSUMING

‣ INEFFECTIVE

‣ LIP-SERVICE

‣ FOR OLD RETIRED MEN

‣ DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT

‣ “NOBODY CARES ABOUT PARTICIPATION: WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS IS EFFICIENCY”

‣ IT IS A TOOL FOR MANIPULATION: IT IS A PUBLIC RELATIONS TOOL FOR THE POWER HOLDERS (ARNSTEIN, 1969)

‣ IT IS A DEVICE FROM THE RIGHT TO JUSTIFY THE END OF THE WELFARE STATE

‣ IT IS A DEVICE FROM THE LEFT TO JUSTIFY THE PROPAGATION OF ITS IDEOLOGY

THE UPSIDE

A-CRITICS OF PARTICIPATION SAY, IT’S

‣ THE SOLUTION FOR ALL OUR PROBLEMS

‣ ANYTHING TOP DOWN IS NECESSARILY BAD, SO EVERYTHING BOTTOM UP IS NECESSARILY GOOD

HTTP://LITHGOW-SCHMIDT.DK/SHERRY-ARNSTEIN/LADDER-OF-CITIZEN-PARTICIPATION.HTML

THE LADDER OF PARTICIPATION (SHERRY ARNSTEIN, 1969)

CITIZ

EN

ENGA

GEME

NTCI

TIZEN

PA

RTIC

IPATIO

NCI

TIZEN

MA

NIPU

LATIO

N

WHO HAS POWER WHEN IMPORTANT DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE?Arnstein, S. (1969). "A Ladder of Citizen Participation." JAIP 35(4): 216-224.

THE ILLUSION OF CONTROLArnstein, S. (1969). "A Ladder of Citizen Participation." JAIP 35(4): 216-224.

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IS (OR COULD BE) THE REDISTRIBUTION OF POWER THAT ENABLES (DISADVANTAGED) CITIZENS TO BE DELIBERATELY INCLUDED IN DECISION MAKING PROCESSES.Arnstein, S. (1969). "A Ladder of Citizen Participation." JAIP 35(4): 216-224.

PARTICIPATION IS A KEY ELEMENT TO ACHIEVE SPATIAL JUSTICE

SPATIAL JUSTICE

TERRITORIAL OR SPATIAL DYNAMICS OF DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH, GOODS AND OPPORTUNITIES

EMPHASIS ON SOCIAL ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIPS HAPPENING IN SPACE

TWO MAIN ‘TYPES’ OF JUSTICE

DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

PROCEDURAL JUSTICE

Distributive Justice

Fairallocationofresourcesandservicesthroughouttheurbanterritory.Inotherwords,resources,servicesandopportunitiesmustbefairly“distributed”byplanningurbanspace.

Justiceorinjusticecanfoundintheplanningprocessesthemselves.Justiceisinthe“procedures”.

Procedural Justice

SPATIAL JUSTICE IS INTIMATELY RELATED TO THE CONCEPT OF THE RIGHT TO THE CITY

RIGHT TO THE CITY

Plato’s The

Republic:the just

man inhabiting

the just city

Copy of Silanion - Marie-Lan Nguyen (User:Jastrow) 2009, CC BY 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7831217

By A.Savin (Wikimedia Commons · WikiPhotoSpace) - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=27948211

Polis is the space of shared decision-making,

otherwise known as ‘politics’.

By After Lysippos - Jastrow (2006), Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1359807

Aristotle: “man is a political animal”We can only achieve the good life by living as citizens in organised societies. In doing so we become fully human (as opposed to animals in a state of nature).

THE SPATIAL DIMENSION OF POLITICS

City:thesharedpoliticalandphysicalspace,wheredecisionsmustbetakenbycitizenstogether. http://timelines.latimes.com/occupy-wall-street-movement/

HANNAH ARENDT

Activecitizenship=Civicengagementandcollectivedeliberationaboutallmattersaffectingthepoliticalcommunity.

Creativecommons:BenNorthernFlickr.Somerightsreserved.

THE ‘POLITICAL COMMUNITY’ IS THE SPACE OF

THE CITY

The political space of the city: the ‘social contract’ that

establishes rights and duties and where government is legitimised

by the consent of the citizens.

https://02varvara.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/19-october-2011-occupy-wall-street-becomes-“occupy-the-world”-why-is-the-us-corporate-media-silent/00-01l-occupy-wall-street-19-10-11-vancouver-bc-canada/

THE RIGHT TO THE CITY=ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP

*right to take part in the affairs of the city *to make decisions about one’s own living environment *realize one’s full potential as a human being

THE RIGHT TO THE CITY IS THE RIGHT TO ACTIVELY SHAPE THE CITY TO ONE’S NEEDS AND DESIRES, THUS EXERCISING ONE’S FULL CITIZENSHIP

ByRobertCrc-Subversivefestivalmedia,FAL,https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=27132002

THE RIGHT TO THE CITY

…isfarmorethantheindividuallibertytoaccessurbanresources:itisarighttochangeourselvesbychangingthecity.Itis,moreover,acommonratherthananindividualrightsincethistransformationinevitablydependsupontheexerciseofacollectivepowertoreshapetheprocessesofurbanisation.Thefreedomtomakeandremakeourcitiesandourselvesis,Iwanttoargue,oneofthemostpreciousyetmost

neglectedofourhumanrights(Harvey,2008)

Participation through electoral systems

Author:StaffSgt.ChristopherAllison.Publicdomain

Disparity of power

CIVIL SOCIETY

PUBLIC SECTOR PRIVATE SECTOR

…designing and planning the built environment are

profoundly political activities in which power relationships must be continually

exposed and power must be distributed.

Active citizenship is not granted, but rather conquered through struggle.

PhotobyArlette.ArletteReloadedonFlickrandInstagram.Reproducedherewithspecialpermission.

SO, WHAT IS THE CONNECTION?

PARTICIPATION ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP RIGHT TO THE CITY SPATIAL JUSTICE

WAIT! ARE YOU SAYING PARTICIPATION WILL DELIVER THE RIGHT TO THE CITY?

IT IS NOT THAT SIMPLE! HOWEVER, IT IS UNDENIABLE THAT ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP

IMPLIES PARTICIPATION AND ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENT

TO ACHIEVE THE RIGHT TO THE CITY.

SO, IN DEFENCE OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION…

WILL ALLOW YOU TO GATHER INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE AVAILABLE

WILL INCORPORATE COMPLEXITY IN DECISION MAKING

WILL BYPASS THE MANY COGNITIVE BIASES WE SUFFER FROM

IS MORE LIKELY TO DELIVER ‘JUST’ OUTCOMES (BECAUSE OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWER)

WILL DELIVER STRONGER COMMUNITIES AND DEMOCRACY-AWARE CITIZENS

WILL STRENGTHEN DEMOCRACY IN THE LONG RUN

HAS THE POTENTIAL TO DELIVER THE RIGHT TO THE CITY

BUT WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

REDUCTION OF DEMOCRATIC SPACE

THE DISCREDIT OF DEMOCRACY

THE FALL OF PUBLIC SPACE

HOMESTEAD, FLORIDA, IS ONE OF A NUMBER OF GATED COMMUNITIES IN THE US. THEY HAVE BECOME MORE POPULAR NOT ONLY FOR CELEBRITIES BUT FOR MIDDLE-CLASS HOMEOWNERS FEARFUL FOR THEIR SAFETY. PHOTOGRAPH: SIPA PRESS/REX

THE PROFOUND CULTURAL ABYSS BETWEEN CITIES, SUBURBS AND RURAL AREAS

CLINTON WON ALMOST 90 PERCENT OF URBAN CORES, WHILE TRUMP WON THE VAST MAJORITY – BETWEEN 75 AND 90 PERCENT – OF SUBURBS, SMALL CITIES AND RURAL AREAS. THOUGH THESE LATTER GEOGRAPHIES ARE MORE SPARSELY POPULATED, THEY WERE HOME TO THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS THIS ELECTION.

HTTPS://WWW.WASHINGTONPOST.COM/GRAPHICS/POLITICS/2016-ELECTION/HOW-ELECTION-MAPS-LIE/

THE RURAL X URBAN DIVIDE

THANKS FOR WATCHING THIS PRESENTATION. SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE WRITE TO: R.C.ROCCO@TUDELFT.NL

TEXT

EXPANDED BIBLIOGRAPHY

ARENDT, H. 1998. The human condition. Chicago, Ill., University of Chicago Press. AENDT, H. 2004. The origins of totalitarianism. New York, Schocken Books. ARISTOTLE, et al. 2001. Politics. Blacksburg, VA, Virginia Tech,: 14 p. AVRITZER, L. 2010. Living under democracy: Participation in its impact on the living conditions of the poor. The Journal of the Latin American Studies Association, 45,

166-185. BERG, A. G. & OSTRY, J. D. 2011. Inequality and Unsustainable growth: Two Sides of the Same Coin? IMF Discussion Note. In: IMF (ed.) IMF Discussion Note. Washington:

IMF. CRICK, B. 2002. Democracy: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford, Oxford University Press. DAHLGREN, P. 2009. Media and Political Engagement: Citizens, Communication, and Democracy. In: BENNETT, W. L. & ENTMAN, R. M. (eds.) Communication, Society and

Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. European Council of Spatial Planners 2015. European Charter on Participatory Democracy in Spatial Planning Processes. Brussels, European Council of Spatial Planners. FOUCAULT, M., et al. 1972. The archaeology of knowledge. World of man. New York, Pantheon Books,: 245 p. FOUCAULT, M. and C. Gordon 1980. Power/knowledge : selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. New York, Pantheon Books. FOUCAULT, M. 2002. The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. London ; New York, Routledge. HARVEY, D. 2008. The Right to the City. New Left Review, Sept/ Oct, 23-40. HARVEY, D. 2012. Rebel cities : from the right to the city to the urban revolution, New York, Verso. HOLSTON, J. 2009. Insurgent citizenship : disjunctions of democracy and modernity in Brazil, Princeton, N.J. ; Woodstock, Princeton University Press. LARSEN, G. L. 2012. An Inquiry into the Theoretical Basis of Sustainability. In: DILLARD, J., DUJON, V. & KING, M. C. (eds.) Understanding the Social Dimension of

Sustainability. London: Routledge. LEFEBVRE, H. 1968. Le Droit à la ville, Paris, Anthropos. LEFEBVRE, H. and K. Goonewardena 2008. Space, difference, everyday life : reading Henri Lefebvre. New York, Routledge. OSTRY, J. D., et al. 2016. "Neoliberalism: Oversold?" Finance & Development 53(2): 38-41. PLATO, et al. 2013. Republic. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. ROCCO, R. 2013. Emerging New Roles for Designers and Planners: Articulating Soft and Hard Infrastructures. Atlantis. Delft: Polis Platform for Urbanism/ TU Delft. ROUSSEAU, J.-J. 1968. The social contract. Harmondsworth, Penguin. SEHESTED, K. 2009. Urban Planners as Network Managers and Metagovernors. Planning Theory and Practice, 10, 245-263. UN-HABITAT 2013. Urban Equity in Development: Cities for Life, Draft Concept paper. In: UN-HABITAT (ed.). Nairobi: UN-Habitat. UN-HUMAN RIGHTS. 2014. Good Governance and Human Rights [Online]. Available: http://www.ohchr.org/en/Issues/Development/GoodGovernance/Pages/

GoodGovernanceIndex.aspx [Accessed 10/04 2014]. WIGMANS, G. 2001. Contingent governance and the enabling city. City, 5, 203-223.