karin hansson: an e-participatory map over process methods in urban planning

Karin Hansson, Love Ekenberg, Göran Cars, Mats Danielson Department of Computer and System Science, Stockholm University

An e-participatory map over process methods in urban planning

Overview

•  Background •  Theory •  Cases of participatory processes in urban

planning •  An e-participatory map

•  Conclusion and future development

23.05.13 / Karin Hansson, [email protected] Department of Computer and System Science

Research team Karin Hansson, PhD student at Stockholm University & Royal Institute of Art Love Ekenberg, Professor in Computer and Systems Sciences at Stockholm University Göran Cars, Professor in Urban Planning at KTH, Royal Institute of Technology Mats Danielson, Professor in Computer and Systems Sciences at Stockholm University + 1 social scientists, 15 artists,2 programmers,4 partners


Problems

•  Contradictory or exaggerated expectations •  Lack of discussion of the concepts of democracy •  Lack of common language

•  Technical determinism

•  Lack of in-depth knowledge of citizen as e-participant


Aim

•  Support interdisciplinarity in the field of e-participation by establishing a general theory

•  Provide means of visualising differences and clarifying representativeness in the participatory process.


Method

To compare the planning processes and the methods used in eight urban development projects in which members of our research team have been actively involved as a researchers. The projects are not primarily “e”

The aim is to understand participation, and to discuss how ICT could be used to support.


Democracy: beyond the state

When those affected by the decision-making also are involved in the decision-making.

•  Agenda: How and by whom are problem defined?

•  Participant: Who is part of the “state”?

•  Method: How is participation enabled?

23.05.13 / Karin Hansson, [email protected], Department of Computer and System Science

Nacka Örebro water

Upplands Väsby

Husby

Högalid

Stockholm Central station

Muskö Eco Village

Stockholm transport

ICT supported mul/-‐criteria, mul/-‐stakeholder decision analysis III Surveys II Itera/ve dialogue process / Chare=e II Moderated dialogues with stakeholders II Town mee/ngs II Exhibi/ons II Online tools like blogs, twi=er and social media I

Örebro Water

AGENDA: Set

•  Problem defined by experts

Muskö eco village

AGENDA: Develops

•  Takes place in local-global public sphere •  Initiated by NGO

Husby urban development

AGENDA: Dominated

•  Takes place in a public sphere •  Local counter-public

Agenda Participants Method

Case Set Develops Dominate All Active Diverse Info Discuss Visualize

Nacka Set

Water Set Develops

Transport

Set

Muskö Develops

Station Set

Högalid Set Dev

Husby Set

UV Develops 23.05.13 / Karin Hansson, [email protected] Department of Computer and System Science

Upplands Väsby urban development

PARTICIPANTS: All

•  Residents today or tomorrow? •  Local residents or everyone affected?

PARTICIPANTS: All or active

•  All affected by the new village •  Active in the planning process

Muskö eco village


PARTICIPANTS: Diverse

•  Diverse opportunities to participate •  Local youth as ambassadors



Nacka Set

Water Set Develops

Transport

Set

Muskö Develops

Station Set

Högalid Set Dev

Husby Set


Nacka

Method: Information

•  Give people access to relevant information •  Multi-criteria, multi-stakeholder decision analysis


Method: Discussion

•  Town meetings, exhibitions, workshops •  ICT supports counter-publics


Method: Visualization

•  Need for methods that visualize and clarify the lack of representativeness in the data

Result



Nacka Set

Water Set Develops

Transport

Set

Muskö Develops

Station Set

Högalid Set Dev

Husby Set


An e-participatory map

PARTICIPANTS

AGEN

DA

Representative Active Non representative

Dominated

Develops

Set

METHOD

Service

M

oderate

Visu

alize


Conclusion

Lack of methods to visualize representation

The e-participatory map:

•  Sort out the project team's expectations

•  Define common concepts

•  Useful when mixing participatory methods

•  Puts ICT in a wider participatory framework

•  Clarify the process for participants


Future development


PARTICIPANTS

AGEN

DA

Representative Active Non representative

Dominated

Develops

Set

METHOD

Service

M

oderate

Visu

alize

karin hansson: an e-participatory map over process methods in urban planning

Technology

husby urban

future development23

khanssondsv

se department

systemssciences

affected

methods

professor