Stakeholders in the Local Service Centre: Who Should be Involved in the Planning Process? Insights from Poland, Czech Republic and Denmark

• Autorzy: Łukasz Damurski , Jacek Pluta , Karel Maier , Hans Thor Andersen
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Local service centres play a vital role in shaping the quality of life in urban neighbourhoods. They offer access to essential everyday services (shops, education, healthcare, personal services) and to public spaces. If they are properly planned and managed, they can bring particular added values to a local community, such as social integration and territorial identification. The history of urban planning has produced several patterns of local service centres (ancient agora, mediaeval market square, neighbourhood unit, modern agora) but today a question arises: how can a local service centre be successfully planned and organised in post-modern political practice? How can its potential be realised and the ever- changing needs, expectations and preferences of local communities be met? Who should be involved in those processes? To answer those questions in this paper we refer to citizen participation and public communication concepts, where selecting the appropriate stakeholders emerges as a necessary starting point for effective urban governance. We present the results of in-depth interviews with local actors (local authorities, municipality officials, town planners, non-governmental organisations, local leaders) in Poland (Wrocław, Siechnice, Ostrów Wielkopolski, Warszawa and Zabierzów), Czech Republic (Prague) and Denmark (Copenhagen). Depending on the specific local context, various stakeholders are perceived as essential to the decision-making process. The power relations and problems encountered in implementing public policy in particular locations have been summarised in three sections: relationships between stakeholders, leadership, and good practices. The paper concludes with a list of typical actors who should be involved in planning, building and managing a local service centre in an urbanised neighbourhood. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Stakeholders; Shared services; Spatial planning; Citizen involvement

PL

Interesariusze; Centra usług; Planowanie przestrzenne; Zaangażowanie obywateli

• Czasopismo: Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series
• Rocznik: 2019
• Numer: No. 43
• Strony: 91--106

Twórcy

autor

Łukasz Damurski

• Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Poland

autor

Jacek Pluta

• University of Wroclaw, Poland

autor

Karel Maier

• České Vysoké Učení Technické v Praze, Czech Republic

autor

Hans Thor Andersen

• Universitet København, Denmark

Bibliografia

• Almendinger, P. (2002). Planning Theory. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Belof, M. (2013). Teoria a praktyka planowania regionalnego: doświadczenia polskie w planowaniu przestrzennym po 1998 r. [Theory and practice of regional planning: the Polish experience in spatial planning after 1998] Wrocław: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej.
• Bourne, L. (2005). Project Relationship Management and the Stakeholder Circle (PhD Thesis). RMIT University, AU. Carmona, M. De Magalhaes, C. Edwards, M. (2010), Stakeholder Views on Value and Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design 7(2): 145-169 .
• City of Stuttgart, Economic Development Department. (2011). Manual for District Centre Managers. Results of the Project MANDIE - Managing District Centres in Northwest Europe.
• Czapiński J. (2015). Stan społeczeństwa obywatelskiego [Condition of civil socjety], in J. Czapiński, J. Panek, T. (Eds.), DIAGNOZA SPOŁECZNA 2015. Warunki i jakość życia Polaków. Raport [Social Diagnosis 2015. Conditions and life quality of Poles], Warszawa: Rada Monitoringu Społecznego. 2015, p. 332-372.
• Damurski, Ł. (2015). From Formal to Semi-formal and Informal Communication in Urban Planning. Insights from Polish Municipalities, European Planning Studies, DOI: http://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2014.993935.
• Damurski Ł. Ładysz, J. Pluta, J. Mayer-Wydra, M. Zipser, W. (2017). Lokalne centrum usługowe: w poszukiwaniu formy i funkcji [Local service centre: in the search for form and function], Przestrzeń społeczna / Social Space Journal. 3/2017(15)s. 1-27.
• Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Rationality and power: democracy in practice. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Gehl, J. (2009). Życie między budynkami: użytkowanie przestrzeni publicznych [Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space], Tłum. M. A. Urbańska. Kraków: Wydawnictwo RAM.
• Hawkins, R.L. Maurer, K. (2010). Bonding, Bridging and Linking: How Social Capital Operated in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. British Journal of Social Work (2010) 40, 1777-1793. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcp087.
• Healey, P. (1992). Planning through debate: the communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planing Review 63(2).
• Heffner, K. Gibas, P. (2013). Delimitacja przestrzenna obszarów wiejskich o słabym dostępie do usług publicznych w województwie lubuskim. [Spatial delimitation of rural areas with low access to public services in Lubuskie region], Zielona Góra.
• Hirt, S. Stanilov, K. (2009). Revisiting Urban Planning in the Transitional Countries. Regional study prepared for Planning Sustainable Cities: Global Report on Human Settlements 2009. Available from http://www.unhabitat.org/grhs/2009. UN Habitat, 2009.
• Innes J., Booher D. (2010). Planning with Complexity. An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. New York: Routledge.
• Jałowiecki, B. Szczepański, M.S. 2002: Miasto i przestrzeń w perspektywie socjologicznej [City and space in sociological perspective], Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe "Scholar".
• Kowicki M. (2004). Współczesna agora. Wybrane problemy kształtowania ośrodków usługowych dla małych społeczności lokalnych [Contemporary agora. Selected problems of shaping service centres for small local communities], Politechnika Krakowska, Kraków.
• Kreutz S. (2007). The Model of Neighbourhood Improvement Districts in Hamburg. New strategies for private sector involvement in area development. Paper for the 2007 EURA conference "The Vital City", Glasgow 12-14 September 2007.
• Maier K. (2018). Planning between transitions: Czech experience. Manuscript for Raumforschung und Raumordnung. ARL.
• Maier, K. Šindlerová, V. (2018), Dostupnost veřejných infrastruktur [Accessibility of public infrastructures], Urbanismus a územní rozvoj 2/2018, 14-25.
• Mitchell, R.K. Agle, B.R. Wood, D.J. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad. Manage. Rev. 22(4): 853-887.
• MMR. (2016). Standardy dostupnosti veřejné infrastruktury [Accessibility Standards for public infrastructure]. http://www.uur.cz/images/8-stanoviska-a-metodiky/53-TB050MMR01-Standardy-dostupnosti-verejne-infrastruktury-2017-10-30.pdf.
• Narang, S. Reutersward, L. (2006). Improved governance and sustainable urban development. Strategic planning holds the key, European Journal of Spatial Development, April 2006, p. 1-11.
• Nase, I. Ocakci, M. (2010). Urban Pattern Dichotomy in Tirana: Socio-spatial Impact of Liberalism, European Planning Studies. 18(11), November 2010, p. 1837-1861.
• Pawłowska, K. (2008). Przeciwdziałanie konfliktom wokół ochrony i kształtowania krajobrazu. Partycypacja społeczna, debata publiczna, negocjacje. [Preventing conflicts around conservation and landscape development. Social participation, public debate, negotiation] (Kraków: Politechnika Krakowska im T. Kościuszki).
• Perry, C. (1998). The Neighbourhood Unit, a Scheme for Arrangement for the Family-Life Community (1929). Reprinted Routledge/Thoemmes, London.
• Project Management Institute. (2013). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Fifth Edition, Newtown Square, PA, USA: Project Management Institute.
• Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York, Simon & Schuster.
• Sager, T. (2009). Planners' Role: Torn between Dialogical Ideals and Neo-liberal Realities, European Planning Studies 17(1), January 2009.
• Sandercock L. (1998). Towards Cosmopolis. Chichester: John Wiley.
• Stanilov, K. (2007). Taking stock of post-socialist urban development: A recapitulation, in: K. Stanilov (Ed.) The Post-Socialist City: Urban Form and Space Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe After Socialism, Geojournal Library, Vol. 92, pp. 3-17 (Dordrecht: Springer).
• Studium uwarunkowań i kierunków zagospodarowania przestrzennego Wrocławia przyjęte uchwałą nr L/1177/18 Rady Miejskiej Wrocławia z dnia 11 stycznia 2018 r. Kierunki zagospodarowania przestrzennego: struktura funkcjonalno-przestrzenna [Study of land use conditions and directions of Wrocław, approved by the City Council resolution No. L/1177/18 of 11 January 2018. Directions of spatial develop ment: functional-spatial structure], Wrocław: Biuro Rozwoju Wrocławia.
• Swyngedouw E. (2010). City or Polis? Profitable Politics... or the End of the Political. IN: Buijs S., Tan W., Tunas D. (Ed.), Megacities. Exploring a sustainable future. 010 Publishers, Rotterdam.
• Szreter, S. and Woolcock, M. (2004). Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health, International Journal of Epidemiology, 33(4), pp. 650 - 67.
• Territorial Agenda of the European Union. 2020. Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions. Agreed at the Informal Ministerial Meeting of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development on 19th May 2011 Gödöllő, Hungary.
• The Planning Academy. (2013). Key stakeholders in the planning system, http://theplanningacademy.com.au/key-stakeholders-in-the-planning-system (29/09/2018).
• Yang R. J. (2014). An investigation of stakeholder analysis in urban development projects: Empirical or rationalistic perspectives. International Journal of Project Management 32(2014): 838-849.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/bog-2019-0006