IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v52y2025i4p770-788.html

Beyond the backyard: Unraveling the geographies of citizens’ engagement in digital participatory planning

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Kajosaari
  • Martina Schorn
  • Kamyar Hasanzadeh
  • Tiina Rinne
  • Saana Rossi
  • Marketta Kyttä

Abstract

Despite the emergence of virtual spaces as arenas for public participation, the geographies of digital participation have gained relatively little attention. Besides considering who participates and why, there is an evident gap in research considering the spatial relationships between the participants of digital urban planning processes and the spaces that are the subject of their participation. This paper proposes a working concept of the spatiality of participation that distinguishes between the spaces in which participation occurs, the spatial realities of the participants, and the spaces as objects of participatory planning. Relationships between these dimensions are investigated empirically with a Public Participation GIS study set in Espoo, Finland, involving 1,731 citizens and over 6,800 future planning and development ideas mapped across the city. The results of the study support prior research observing that e-participation has the potential to spatially expand participation processes both in terms of the involved public and the spatial knowledge they produce. However, our results also show that online participation may capture spatial ties between people and places that differ from those of traditional participation modes, ranging from place-protective behaviors close to the residential location to more casual spatial attachments.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Kajosaari & Martina Schorn & Kamyar Hasanzadeh & Tiina Rinne & Saana Rossi & Marketta Kyttä, 2025. "Beyond the backyard: Unraveling the geographies of citizens’ engagement in digital participatory planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 52(4), pages 770-788, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:52:y:2025:i:4:p:770-788
    DOI: 10.1177/23998083241271460
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23998083241271460
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/23998083241271460?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eveliina Harsia & Pilvi Nummi, 2024. "Urban planning as ‘great dialogue’? Developing polyphonic planning practices in a process of hybrid participation, case Viiskorpi, Espoo, Finland," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(5), pages 855-875, September.
    2. Hanna Mattila & Pilvi Nummi, 2022. "The Challenge of the Digital Public Sphere: Finnish Experiences of the Role of Social Media in Participatory Planning," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 406-422, May.
    3. Elham Hesari & Seyedeh Masoumeh Moosavy & Amirreza Rohani & Sepideh Besharati Kivi & Mitra Ghafourian & Bahram Saleh Sedgh Pour, 2020. "Investigation the Relationship Between Place Attachment and Community Participation in Residential Areas: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 921-941, October.
    4. Torill Nyseth & Torill Ringholm & Annika Agger, 2019. "Innovative Forms of Citizen Participation at the Fringe of the Formal Planning System," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 7-18.
    5. Hannon, Bruce, 1994. "Sense of place: geographic discounting by people, animals and plants," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 157-174, July.
    6. Raine Mäntysalo & Karoliina Jarenko & Kristina L. Nilsson & Inger-Lise Saglie, 2015. "Legitimacy of Informal Strategic Urban Planning-Observations from Finland, Sweden and Norway," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 349-366, February.
    7. Maud Donders & Thomas Hartmann & Anita Kokx, 2014. "E-Participation in Urban Planning: Getting and Keeping Citizens Involved," International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 3(2), pages 54-69, April.
    8. Enzo Falco & Reinout Kleinhans, 2018. "Digital Participatory Platforms for Co-Production in Urban Development: A Systematic Review," International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 7(3), pages 52-79, July.
    9. Torill Nyseth & Torill Ringholm & Annika Agger, 2019. "Innovative Forms of Citizen Participation at the Fringe of the Formal Planning System," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 7-18.
    10. Maarit Kahila-Tani & Anna Broberg & Marketta Kyttä & Taylor Tyger, 2016. "Let the Citizens Map—Public Participation GIS as a Planning Support System in the Helsinki Master Plan Process," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 195-214, March.
    11. Nader Afzalan & Brian Muller, 2018. "Online Participatory Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges for Enriching Participatory Planning," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 84(2), pages 162-177, April.
    12. Marijana Pantić & Juaneé Cilliers & Guido Cimadomo & Fernando Montaño & Olusola Olufemi & Sally Torres Mallma & Johan van den Berg, 2021. "Challenges and Opportunities for Public Participation in Urban and Regional Planning during the COVID-19 Pandemic—Lessons Learned for the Future," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, December.
    13. Anna M. Hersperger & Corina Thurnheer-Wittenwiler & Silvia Tobias & Sara Folvig & Christian Fertner, 2022. "Digitalization in land-use planning: effects of digital plan data on efficiency, transparency and innovation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(12), pages 2537-2553, December.
    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. Torill Nyseth & Abdelillah Hamdouch, 2019. "The Transformative Power of Social Innovation in Urban Planning and Local Development," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 1-6.
    2. Ruth Potts & Alex Lord & John Sturzaker, 2024. "Automatic for the people? Problematising the potential of digital planning," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(12), pages 2435-2451, September.
    3. Lina Naoroz Bråten & Marius G Vigen, 2025. "Community engagement through the neighbourhood street festival: Between external simulation and local stimulation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 62(14), pages 2824-2841, November.
    4. Miroslav Kopáček, 2021. "Land-Use Planning and the Public: Is There an Optimal Degree of Civic Participation?," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Jan Lilliendahl Larsen & Martin Severin Frandsen, 2022. "Urban Drama: Power Mediation in Antagonistic Copenhagen," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 326-339.
    6. Darren Sharp & Rob Raven, 2021. "Urban Planning by Experiment at Precinct Scale: Embracing Complexity, Ambiguity, and Multiplicity," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 195-207.
    7. Ulrik Kohl & John Andersen, 2022. "Copenhagen’s Struggle to Become the World’s First Carbon Neutral Capital: How Corporatist Power Beats Sustainability," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 230-241.
    8. Pilvi Nummi, 2018. "Crowdsourcing Local Knowledge with PPGIS and Social Media for Urban Planning to Reveal Intangible Cultural Heritage," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 100-115.
    9. Claire Daniel & Christopher Pettit, 2022. "Charting the past and possible futures of planning support systems: Results of a citation network analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(7), pages 1875-1892, September.
    10. Baxter, Jamie Scott & Chatzichristos, Georgios & Christmann, Gabriela & Hennebry, Barraí & Kovanen, Sunna & Novikova, Marina & Olmedo, Lucas & Stoustrup, Sune W. & van Twuijver, Mara & Umantseva, Anna, 2020. "Social Enterprises in Structurally Weak Rural Regions: Innovative Troubleshooters in Action. Handbook for Practitioners," IRS Dialog 6/2020, Leibniz Institute for Research on Society and Space (IRS).
    11. repec:osf:socarx:9ghrn_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Torill Nyseth & Abdelillah Hamdouch, 2019. "The Transformative Power of Social Innovation in Urban Planning and Local Development," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 1-6.
    13. Griffin, Greg Phillip & Jiao, Junfeng, 2019. "The Geography and Equity of Crowdsourced Public Participation for Active Transportation Planning," SocArXiv 9ghrn, Center for Open Science.
    14. Alattar, Mohammad Anwar & Cottrill, Caitlin & Beecroft, Mark, 2021. "Public participation geographic information system (PPGIS) as a method for active travel data acquisition," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    15. Pate, Jennifer & Loomis, John, 1997. "The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 199-207, March.
    16. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Seth Baum & William Easterling, 2010. "Space-time discounting in climate change adaptation," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 591-609, August.
    18. Deal, Brian & Schunk, Daniel, 2004. "Spatial dynamic modeling and urban land use transformation: a simulation approach to assessing the costs of urban sprawl," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 79-95, November.
    19. James Charlton & Ian Babelon & Richard Watson & Caitlin Hafferty, 2023. "Phygitally Smarter? A Critically Pragmatic Agenda for Smarter Engagement in British Planning and Beyond," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 17-31.
    20. Erik Glaas & Mattias Hjerpe & Martin Karlson & Tina-Simone Neset, 2020. "Visualization for Citizen Participation: User Perceptions on a Mainstreamed Online Participatory Tool and Its Usefulness for Climate Change Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    21. Muhammad Tayyab Sohail & Shaoming Chen, 2022. "Public perceptions About Foreign Investment, A PLS-SEM Analysis toward republic sustainable infrastructure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-16, November.

    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:sae:envirb:v:52:y:2025:i:4:p:770-788. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.