IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i14p5539-d382286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards a Revised Framework for Participatory Planning in the Context of Risk

Author

Listed:
  • Paola Rizzi

    (Department of Architecture, Design and Urban Planning, University of Sassari, 07100 Sassari, Italy)

  • Anna Porębska

    (Faculty of Architecture, Cracow University of Technology, 31-155 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

Community participation is widely acknowledged to be crucial in both mitigation and reconstruction planning, as well as in community-based disaster risk reduction (CBDRR) and community-based disaster mitigation (CBDM) processes. However, despite decades of experience, an efficient framework that is acceptable for all actors and suitable for all different phases of the process—ranging from planning to post-disaster recovery—is lacking. The examples presented in this paper shed light on the different dynamics of participatory design processes and compare situations in which participatory design and community planning were introduced before, during, or after a disastrous or potentially disastrous event. Others emphasize the consequences of participation not being introduced at all. Analysis of these processes allows the authors to speculate on a revised, universal model for participatory planning in vulnerable territories and in the context of risk. By emphasizing intrinsic relations of different elements of the process, particularly the responsibility that different actors are prepared—or forced—to take, this article offers insight towards a framework for post-2020 participatory planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Paola Rizzi & Anna Porębska, 2020. "Towards a Revised Framework for Participatory Planning in the Context of Risk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-23, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5539-:d:382286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5539/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5539/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Warren E. Walker & Marjolijn Haasnoot & Jan H. Kwakkel, 2013. "Adapt or Perish: A Review of Planning Approaches for Adaptation under Deep Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-25, March.
    2. World Bank, 2012. "The Great East Japan Earthquake--Learning from Megadisasters : Knowledge Notes, Executive Summary," World Bank Publications - Reports 17107, The World Bank Group.
    3. Anna Porębska & Paola Rizzi & Satoshi Otsuki & Masahiro Shirotsuki, 2019. "Walkability and Resilience: A Qualitative Approach to Design for Risk Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. J. J. Warmink & M. Brugnach & J. Vinke-de Kruijf & R. M. J. Schielen & D. C. M. Augustijn, 2017. "Coping with Uncertainty in River Management: Challenges and Ways Forward," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(14), pages 4587-4600, November.
    2. Ahmed, Farhana & Moors, Eddy & Khan, M. Shah Alam & Warner, Jeroen & Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Catharien, 2018. "Tipping points in adaptation to urban flooding under climate change and urban growth: The case of the Dhaka megacity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 496-506.
    3. Broitman, Dani & Ben-Haim, Yakov, 2022. "Forecasting residential sprawl under uncertainty: An info-gap analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Andri Ottesen & Dieter Thom & Rupali Bhagat & Rola Mourdaa, 2023. "Learning from the Future of Kuwait: Scenarios as a Learning Tool to Build Consensus for Actions Needed to Realize Vision 2035," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-25, April.
    5. Bethany Robinson & Jonathan D. Herman, 2019. "A framework for testing dynamic classification of vulnerable scenarios in ensemble water supply projections," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 431-448, March.
    6. Annelie Holzkämper, 2017. "Adapting Agricultural Production Systems to Climate Change—What’s the Use of Models?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-15, October.
    7. Francesca Abastante & Isabella M. Lami & Luigi La Riccia & Marika Gaballo, 2020. "Supporting Resilient Urban Planning through Walkability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Lucio, D. & Lara, J.L. & Tomás, A. & Losada, I.J., 2024. "Probabilistic assessment of climate-related impacts and risks in ports," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    9. William Mobley & Kayode O. Atoba & Wesley E. Highfield, 2020. "Uncertainty in Flood Mitigation Practices: Assessing the Economic Benefits of Property Acquisition and Elevation in Flood-Prone Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Günther Schauberger & Christian Mikovits & Werner Zollitsch & Stefan J. Hörtenhuber & Johannes Baumgartner & Knut Niebuhr & Martin Piringer & Werner Knauder & Ivonne Anders & Konrad Andre & Isabel Hen, 2019. "Global warming impact on confined livestock in buildings: efficacy of adaptation measures to reduce heat stress for growing-fattening pigs," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 567-587, October.
    11. Seyed Ahmad Reza Mir Mohammadi Kooshknow & Rob den Exter & Franco Ruzzenenti, 2020. "An Exploratory Agent-Based Modeling Analysis Approach to Test Business Models for Electricity Storage," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-14, April.
    12. Anna Porębska & Paola Rizzi & Satoshi Otsuki & Masahiro Shirotsuki, 2019. "Walkability and Resilience: A Qualitative Approach to Design for Risk Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    13. Jannie Coenen & Rob van der Heijden & Allard C. R. van Riel, 2019. "Making a Transition toward more Mature Closed-Loop Supply Chain Management under Deep Uncertainty and Dynamic Complexity: A Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-27, April.
    14. P. Velarde & X. Tian & A. D. Sadowska & J. M. Maestre, 2019. "Scenario-Based Hierarchical and Distributed MPC for Water Resources Management with Dynamical Uncertainty," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(2), pages 677-696, January.
    15. Ghouchani, Mahya & Taji, Mohammad & Cheheltani, Atefeh Sadat & Chehr, Mohammad Seifi, 2021. "Developing a perspective on the use of renewable energy in Iran," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    16. Matteo Giuliani & Andrea Castelletti, 2016. "Is robustness really robust? How different definitions of robustness impact decision-making under climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 409-424, April.
    17. Gerald Potutan & Masaru Arakida, 2021. "Evolving Disaster Response Practices during COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-11, March.
    18. B. Gersonius & J. Rijke & R. Ashley & P. Bloemen & E. Kelder & C. Zevenbergen, 2016. "Adaptive Delta Management for flood risk and resilience in Dordrecht, The Netherlands," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 82(2), pages 201-216, June.
    19. Judy Lawrence & Robert Bell & Adolf Stroombergen, 2019. "A Hybrid Process to Address Uncertainty and Changing Climate Risk in Coastal Areas Using Dynamic Adaptive Pathways Planning, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis & Real Options Analysis: A New Zealand App," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    20. Annuska Rantanen & Juho Rajaniemi, 2020. "Urban planning in the post-zoning era: From hierarchy to self-organisation in the reform of the Finnish Land Use and Building Act," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(2), pages 321-335, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5539-:d:382286. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.