Debating Participation

DEBATING PARTICIPATION ACTORS SHAPING SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT Edited by Gustavo Ribeiro Søren Lund Michael Mullins Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts School of Architecture 2004 CONTENTS Introduction 7 Gustavo Ribeiro, Søren Lund, Michael Mullins Debating Participation 21 Participation and Agency: Hybrid Identities in the Making of Green Knowledge Andrew Jamison 37 Participation and Consensus-seeking for Sustainable Development? The Experience of the Danish LA21 Approach Jesper Holm Communities 65 Urban Development Discourses, Environmental Management and Public Participation: The Case of the Mae Kha Canal in Chiang Mai – Thailand Gustavo Ribeiro , Angunthip Srisuwan 81 Participation as Symbolic Violence: The Social Dynamics of an Environmental Project in Southern Thailand Mikkel Funder Government and Civil Society 95 The Stories of Two Bridges in Ghana: Facts from Research Spiced with a Little Fiction. Jørgen Andreasen 2 | Debating Participation 101 Participation in a Post-Socialist Society – Cases from Mozambique Jørgen Eskemose 129 Participation – A Road Leading to Democracy? Elisabeth Riber Christensen 137 Social Shaping of a Community-Based Organisation‘s Activities – The Case of the Meadowlands Environmental Group, South Africa Søsser Brodersen, Christian Eghoff and Michael Søgaard Architects and Planners 157 Architectural Practice in South Africa Rodney Harber 163 Participation and 3D Visualisation Tools Mikkel Holm Jensen, Sune Henriksen, Mette Haase, Morten B. Kristiansen, Morten Mogensen, Michael Mullins Lessons Learned and Emerging Issues 173 Lessons Learned from Practical Application of PEP in Southern Thailand: Ensuring Local Ownership to Projects Jens Lønholdt 185 Why and How to Negotiate an Environment for Participation Søren Skou Rasmussen 198 Workshop Programme INTRODUCTION 4 | Debating Participation I I I I I I INTRODUCTION 6 | Debating Participation INTRODUCTION The research network “Public Participation in Environmental Projects” (PEP) was created by members of the Linked University Consortia for Environment and Development – Industry and Urban Areas (LUCED-I&UA) involved in studying, planning or advising urban environmental development or management projects and programs. PEP started off through a dialogue between Danish and Thai researchers (also involved in DUCED activities), who experienced that a number of projects in Thailand, which had considerable environmental impact, came to a halt due to people’s protests – they thus highlighted the importance and timeliness of promoting public participation. One of the projects they mentioned was the implementation of two new ring-roads in Chiang Mai, which involved the construction of fly-over crossings at several inter- sections. They mentioned people’s protests about a road infrastructure solution, which allegedly would lead to an increase in automobile traffic and would affect the historical identity of Chiang Mai. This initiative prompted us to renew our views on an issue which has been discussed for over three decades and which has become a catchword; and prompted a critical discussion of recent and current practices of public participation in environmental projects as well as conceptualisations of those practices. An initial brain-storm meeting amongst interested LUCED researchers in 2001 identified research and networking needs of two kinds: One group (the majority of the PEP Network) of LUCED members work as technical specialists in urban or environmental planning & management projects where participatory strategies are adopted. Their interest was in setting up a forum to discuss technical aspects of the practice of participation and their relationship to theory. Another smaller group of members explicitly made the study of participatory processes a major focal point of their research and teaching. Their interest was to get access to more empirical case-data in order to further develop their research topics on participatory planning for sustainable development. In response to this combination of interests, a workshop was organised at the Royal Danish Academy of Arts in Copenhagen, June 11-13, 2003 with the title: “Debating participation: Actors Shaping Sustainable Urban Development”. The point of departure was taken in the claim that much effort has gone into defining the principles of partici- Introduction | 7 pation and how to do it, but that not as much effort has been directed to the understanding of what actually goes on, when participation takes place in practice. This publication consists of the proceedings from that workshop. The papers that were presented in the workshop build on experiences and reflections of practitioners and academics and bring into question a number of issues surrounding public participation: - Who participates? - Who is excluded? - What role do different segments of a heterogeneous community play in a participatory process? - What role do leaders play in a development/environmental project? - Who is the community? What role does it play in the process of initiation of a development project? - Who has what knowledge and how is it used? - What roles do specialists, such as architects, play in participatory projects? Concerning the case of the flyovers in Chiang Mai, it emerged that those behind the protests were specific interest organisations, such as the Thai Architects Association, the Chiang Mai Tourist Board, and the I Love You Chiang Mai Association. The inhabitants of Chiang Mai were not mobilised by such an issue, not even those who had business or accommodation in sites neighbouring the flyovers. An Indian film-maker, Shaina Anand, who has spent the last few years documenting civic movements in Mumbai, wrote as she looked back at her experiences that: „There was a huge distance between the people’s movement and the people” Clearly, a closer look at so-called participatory practices challenges commonly accepted normative models. In the fly-over project in Chiang Mai, the protests by specific organisations surely caused a momentary ruffle, but the construction of flyovers has gone ahead unabated. The workshop was an opportunity to debate and reflect over such experiences. Structure of the workshop The subtitle: „Actors Shaping Sustainable Urban Development“ provides a guide to the structure of this workshop, namely that the sessions that constitute its body are organised around actors such as communities, governments, civil societies, architects and planners. The workshop was structured with an introductory session followed by six sessions focussed on various aspects of participation. These proceedings are organised in the same order. 8 | Debating Participation Opening session: The background and objectives of the workshop were addressed in the opening speech by the Rector of the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Prof. Sven Felding and in Gustavo Ribeiro’s introductory address. This introductory address was followed by a presentation by the Director of DUCED-IUA Niels Thygesen, who outlined its scope of interest, activities, partnerships and research networks. Session 1, Debating Participation, was intended as a space for raising conceptual issues that could inform subsequent discussions throughout the workshop. As it was later expressed by Søren Lund in the conclusion and summing up of the workshop, the debates in question could be situated within a conceptual framework for the construction of “participation” (see Figure 1). According to this framework, a number of different aspects can be discussed when debating participation. A very fundamental aspect is the underlying rationale or purpose of participation. The debate here essentially fluctuates between an instrumental management view of participation as a means to deliver certain collective goods and services (infrastructure, environmental management, etc.) or compliance with regulatory measures, or a normative view of participation as development goal, either as part of a political strategy of empowerment of marginalized and weak social groups, or as an element of practicing good (democratic) governance. This divide runs right through discussions of participation and urban (environmental) planning, too. Figure 1: Constructing the concept of participation. Rhetoric Practise Purpose? Who? In What? NORMS AND FORMS Discourse Definition How? With what? Practise THEORY Outcomes Shaping Impacts Contextual / casual Introduction | 9 The purpose of participation is reflected in the upper half of figure 1, which covers the aspects which could be termed the “norms and forms” of participatory practices. That is, who is (or should be) participating in what kind of activities? What do (or should) they participate with? And how are (or should) the participation processes be handled (meet- ings, PRA sessions, contracts, facilitation, etc.)? The very definition of the term participation can vary as different combinations of these elements. And, as it was discussed during the seminar, there is often a wide gap between the rhetoric with which participation is prescribed, and the reality of how it is being practiced. Part of the picture is our theoretical understanding of the term and the practice of it as a social phenomenon. Arguments for one or the other model of participation are not just referring to rationales and purposes, but also to such theories about what are the shaping factors of participation and the preconditions for its successful implementation. Discussions are also referring to more or less explicitly stated assumptions about expected

Load more