, A. and
Robbers, G. (eds.). Verfassung, Philosophie, Kirche (Festschrift für Alexander Hollerbach zum 70 Geburtstag), 363-384. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Brintnall, M. (2011). PublicParticipation in Rulemaking: Interests v. Information. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265894346 PublicParticipation in Rulemaking Interests v Information.
Bröhmer, J. (2004). Transparenz als Verfassungsprinzip: Grundgesetz und Europäische Union. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Bryde, B. O. (1994). Die
Muki Haklay, Piotr Jankowski and Zbigniew Zwoliński
Information Science 12(4): 299–314.
Carver S., 2001. Participation and Geographical Information. ESF-NSF Workshop on Access to Geographic Information and Participatory Approaches Using Geographic Information , Spoleto, 6–8 December 2001.
Czepkiewicz M., Brudka C., Jankowski P., Kaczmarek P., Zwoliński Zb., Mikuła Ł., Bąkowska E., Młodkowski M., Wójcicki M., 2016. PublicParticipation GIS for sustainable urban mobility planning: methods, applications and challenges. Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna 35: 9–35.
Dunn Ch.E, 2007. Participatory GIS – a
planning in public park design. The article describes how and why publicparticipation for landscape architects was introduced at Politechnika Krakowska (Cracow University of Technology, later referred to as CUT) and what inspired the development of the teaching programme. The theoretical background shows the links to the main theories in this field referring to both local and international researchers. Then the author justifies the choice of a public park as an appropriate topic for participatory design and refers to successful case studies from Poland and other
In recent years, there has been a noticeable increase in the desire to promote publicparticipation in urban development. Planners have become increasingly aware of the value of the knowledge held by local citizens as a means to enhance the quality of urban development projects. Events such as the turmoil seen in Germany in relation to the Stuttgart21 Project ( Böhm 2011 : 615) indicate a need for efficient participation processes. On the other hand, several participation projects, such as Tempelhofer Feld in Berlin ( Heuser & Bodenmeier 2016
The importance of delegated legislation is growing in both the quantitative and qualitative sense. Under the American system, the so-called division of rulemaking authority between the legislative and executive branch was resolved at a very early juncture and in a highly pragmatic manner by applying the fundamental principles of the legislative procedure to the level of the rulemaking procedure, which primarily implies the transparency and openness of the latter. Conversely, Continental Europe did not develop a general theory of public participation which could provide a basis for the search for solutions to the situation. The purpose of this paper is to present different concepts of the rulemaking procedure and discuss the question of public participation. We conclude that, as the quantity and complexity of societal relationships grow, it is fruitful to use the so-called problem-solving model of the rulemaking procedure as a starting point for its procedural arrangement. This allows us to focus on the role that civil society, interest groups and the general public play in the contemporary governance process.
The rhetoric and reality of publicparticipation in planning
Publicparticipation is a political principle and practice that seeks and facilitates the involvement of citizens potentially affected by, or interested in, a decision. The principle of publicparticipation in planning holds that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision making process, and that their contribution will influence the decision ( Barlow 1995 ). Publicparticipation in planning is seen by many as a means of citizen empowerment and as a key element
1. PublicParticipation in Europe : An international perspective, 2009 [online]. European Institute for publicparticipation [cited 01.10.2016]. http://www.partizipation.at/eipp_public_participation0.html
2. Hofmann, S. Architecture Is Participation : Die Baupiloten : Methods and Projects. Berlin: Jovis, 2015. 206 p.
3. Mickos, M. An architecture of participation, 2012 [online]. Opensource [cited 01.10.2016]. https://opensource.com/business/12/6/architecture-participation
4. Murray, M., Greer, J., Houston, D
of all the views and efforts of this type in Poland. Be then forewarned: this criticism does not concern everyone but rather the average state of affairs.
As in a sense I am going to discuss what participation is not , I’d like to present what participation is (after K. Pawłowska (2008) ). Its full programme is summarised in Table 1 .
Programme of publicparticipation in planning, conservation, and design projects
Source: Pawłowska et al. 2010 : 25–31
Successive stages of a project and phases of participation
Stages of the
Edyta Bąkowska-Waldmann, Cezary Brudka and Piotr Jankowski
human–computer interaction. Computers in Human Behavior 23, 1881–1893.
Brabham, D. C. 2009. “Crowdsourcing the PublicParticipation Process for Planning Projects.” Planning Theory 8 (3): 242–262. doi:10.1177/1473095209104824.
Broberg, A., Kyttä, M., & Fagerholm, N. (2013). Child-friendly urban structures: Bullerby revisited. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 35, 110–120.
Brown G., Kytta M., 2014. Key issues and research priorities for publicparticipation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Applied Geography 46: 122
Henn Korjus, Priit Põllumäe, Andres Kiviste, Ahto Kangur, Diana Laarmann, Risto Sirgmets and Mait Lang
A new paradigm in forest management using a streaming input of public participation needs effective online solutions. The process should be real-time, secure, effective and efficient. People are expected to share their data and thoughts on forest management with forest owners for improving forest management and planning. The participatory approach supports communication within society and can be designed as an interactive web-based solution. Many pre-requisites have already been met and society is ready for a successful start of an interactive participatory forest planning system in Estonia. People use digital identification for various purposes and the state already maintains an online public forest register. Motivating people to participate in the planning process is always challenging yet important for the successful implementation of the system. The system should allow simulating the development and management of forest stands following the participatory input and using ecosystem models and economic calculations. The outputs from the system include management alternatives, risk assessments and financial reports. The system requires a reliable financial compensation scheme to ensure overall long-term stability of the system and agreements between interested persons or groups and forest owners.