Why participatory planning fails

Why participatory planning fails (and how to fix it)

https://norcalapa.org/2021/05/why-participatory-planning-fails-and-how-to-fix-it/

 

Northern News

A publication of the American Planning Association, California Chapter, Northern Section

Making great communities happen

June 2021

 

By some metrics, Denver leads the U.S. in displacement of Latino residents, and there are meetings — so many meetings — all focused on gathering resident input on coming changes.

 

… the city seeks their input on projects but doesn’t listen to their concerns.

 

… a future where, without significant investment in affordable housing, displacement seemed assured.

 

She realized she needed to slow down to build relationships with residents, bringing as many people as possible into the fold while acknowledging the long-term contributions of the three or four people who always show up.

 

Research shows that participatory planning addresses the needs of older, whiter, and wealthier residents.

 

It’s harder for people with kids, long work hours, or lower incomes to contribute, so recently some community activists who participate regularly have advocated to be paid for their time, pointing out that community engagement professionals are salaried.

 

In a study of participation in zoning forums for new housing development in Massachusetts, Einstein found that participants who gave their feedback to city councils opposing new affordable housing developments were whiter, older, and wealthier than the average resident in their cities.

 

… residents “participated without power.” In other words, community members showed up to meetings guiding development but their feedback was not incorporated in planning decisions.

 

“There’s nothing that holds anyone accountable for … taking in feedback,” said Nola Miguel, the executive director of the GES Coalition, a group that has organized around housing access since 2015. “It really frustrates me that equity and community process are put in the same sort of box when an equitable process is very different from a general community process.”

 

If the engagement process was good enough for the city but not rigorous enough for activists, it raises the question: What counts as good participation? Surveys, meetings, flyers, coffee hours, focus groups, and petitions can all help planners understand community needs. But without a more comprehensive approach that includes standards for participatory approaches, cities may continue to reach their targets for involving constituents in the planning process while the most vulnerable residents go unheard.

 

She wants to see heavily impacted communities use a Community Bill of Rights, a strategy promoted by the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund to increase local control in decision-making. And a more holistic approach to engagement in the planning process — rather than one that’s project based —

 

The key to better participation, for Miguel, is to distinguish community engagement processes at large from equity-focused development. She pointed to tools that other cities have used to judge fairness in development processes — like Minneapolis’ Equitable Development Scorecard.