IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Modernising Planning: Public Participation in the UK Planning System

Listed author(s):
  • Alan Townsend


  • Janet Tully


Registered author(s):

    In the UK the formal land-use planning system is once more at a crossroads with the unprecedented levels of public comment on the recent Governmental Green Paper on Planning. A recent international report on the planning process in Westernised countries highlighted a dearth of public participation in the UK planning system this is despite an obvious undercurrent of concern on environmental issues and the like. The paper sets out to gauge the extent of public interest in the Planning system, in the light of current proposals to revise it. The paper concentrates on the nature of public participation in Planning and to consider whether the public are more satisfied with process, seeing it as fair and robust, if they are more actively involved in the process of consultation. Other aspects to consider are the need to seek consultation from the wider public, not just individuals and special interest groups. There are several forgotten frontiers of the past effort to promote public participation. Theory dating from the 1970s exposed differences between sociological approaches in Planning and solutions tended to be lost in complexity of Local Development Plans. Subsequent theory (Healey 1997) has argued for the need to reconcile plural interests across localities. What is neglected in the research is the fuller appreciation of the actual public interest by those in the Planning system. A recent international report by Heriott-Watt University, Edinburgh and DePaul University, Chicago called for the notion of ‘public participation’ to be turned on its head and instead encourage the practice of ‘participatory planning’- the use of third parties to pre-mediate conflicts between stakeholders before and during the process of an open consultation as opposed to seeking public opinions after the plans have been drawn. This paper aims to review the modernising agenda and set out the case for shifting public participation to participatory planning within the context of the UK. Particularly pertinent due to recent recommendations to increase sustainability communities. It uses several qualitative case studies drawn from urban planning authorities and rural districts from the UK, which reveal Local Planning Authorities may be as yet unprepared to fully grasp the concepts underpinning the notion of participatory planning.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa04p51.

    in new window

    Date of creation: Aug 2004
    Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa04p51
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria

    Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa04p51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gunther Maier)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.