Master Thesis in Geographical Information Science nr 74 PPGIS and Public meetings – An evaluation of public participation methods for urban planning Daniel Gardevärn 2017 Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science Centre for Geographical Information Systems Lund University Sölvegatan 12 S-223 62 Lund Sweden Daniel Gardevärn (2017). PPGIS and public meetings – An evaluation of public participation methods for urban planning Master degree thesis, 30/ credits in Master in Geographical Information Science Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science, Lund University ii PPGIS and public meetings An evaluation of public participation methods for urban planning Daniel Gardevärn (2017) Master degree thesis, 30 credits in Master in Geographical Information Sciences Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science, Lund University Supervisor: Jonathan Seaquist, Associate Professor, Department of Physical Geography & Ecosystem Science, Lund University iii iv Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... ix Swedish abstract ...................................................................................................................................... x Wordlist ................................................................................................................................................... xi Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................... xii 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of the study ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Research questions ................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Structure ........................................................................................................................................ 3 2. Background ......................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Historical and geographical background ....................................................................................... 5 2.2 Public participation........................................................................................................................ 6 2.2.1 What is public participation? ................................................................................................. 6 2.2.2 Public participation praxis in Sweden .................................................................................... 6 2.2.3 What is PPGIS? ....................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Theoretical background ................................................................................................................. 9 2.3.1 Top-down and bottom-up approaches ................................................................................ 12 2.4 A framework for evaluating participation methods .................................................................... 13 3. Methodology..................................................................................................................................... 15 3.1 Data ............................................................................................................................................. 15 3.1.1 Data regarding framework for evaluating participation methods ....................................... 15 3.1.2 PPGIS data ............................................................................................................................ 16 3.1.3 Background data................................................................................................................... 18 3.1.4 Administrative data for the city of Helsingborg ................................................................... 20 3.2 A framework for evaluating participation methods .................................................................... 20 3.3 Spatial-Analyses ........................................................................................................................... 23 3.3.1. Response rates and hot spot mapping ................................................................................ 23 4. Results ............................................................................................................................................... 27 4.1 A framework for evaluating participation methods .................................................................... 27 4.1.1 Acceptance criterion ............................................................................................................ 27 4.1.2 Criterion of independence ................................................................................................... 33 4.1.3 Criterion of early involvement ............................................................................................. 34 4.1.4 Criterion of transparency ..................................................................................................... 34 v 4.1.5 Criterion of influence ............................................................................................................ 35 4.1.6 Criteria of structured decision-making ................................................................................. 36 4.1.7 Criterion of cost-effectiveness ............................................................................................. 38 4.2 GIS-Analyses ................................................................................................................................ 40 4.2.1 Response rate analysis ......................................................................................................... 40 4.2.2 Hotspot Analysis ................................................................................................................... 42 5. Discussion.......................................................................................................................................... 47 5.1 A framework for evaluating participation methods .................................................................... 47 5.1.1 Acceptance Criterion ............................................................................................................ 47 5.1.2 Criterion of independence ................................................................................................... 50 5.1.3 Criterion of early involvement ............................................................................................. 51 5.1.4 Criterion of transparency ..................................................................................................... 52 5.1.5 Criterion of influence ............................................................................................................ 53 5.1.6 Criteria of structured decisions-making ............................................................................... 54 5.1.7 Criterion of cost-effectiveness ............................................................................................. 54 5.2 GIS-Analyses ................................................................................................................................ 55 5.2.1 Response rates ..................................................................................................................... 55 5.2.2 Hotspot analysis ................................................................................................................... 56 5.2.3 The framework of evaluation and the GIS-analysis ............................................................. 57 5.3 Limitations ................................................................................................................................... 58 5.4 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 60 5.5 Further studies ............................................................................................................................ 61 Reference list ......................................................................................................................................... 63 Appendix A ............................................................................................................................................ 67 vi Figures Figure 1 - Extent of the study, ................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 2 - Arnsteins participation ladder .............................................................................................. 10 Figure 3 - Flowchart of the study………………………………………………………………………………………………………15 Figure 4 – Districts of Helsingborg ........................................................................................................ 19 Figure 5 – Getis-ord Gi* - Standard deviation of z- and p-values, which the result is based on .......... 25 Figure 6 – Age-group distribution from the pre-consultations ............................................................