What Difference Does Public Participation Make? An Alternative Futures Assessment Based on the Development Preferences for Cultural Landscape Corridor Planning in the Silk Roads Area, China

作者: Xu , Plieninger , Zhao , Primdahl

DOI: 10.3390/SU11226525

关键词:

摘要: Landscape corridor planning (LCP) has become a widespread practice for promoting sustainable regional development. This highly complex process covers many policy and issues concerning the local landscape, ideally involves people who live in area to be developed. In China, planners administrators encourage development of landscape planning. However, current LCP rarely considers ideas from residents, public participation is not recognized as beneficial outcomes. We use specific Chinese case analyze how citizen involvement may enrich spatial respect considered solutions To this end, we compare recently approved plan that was created without with alternative same corridor, developed residents. These alternatives were then evaluated by professional had been involved initial process. demonstrate concrete differences between participation. Further, show collaborative processes can minimize conflicts. Finally, does indeed contribute innovations could produced exclusively decision-makers. The paper closes discussion difficulties might accompany residents during China.

参考文章(21)
Patsy Healey, Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society Town Planning Review. ,vol. 69, pp. 1- ,(1998) , 10.3828/TPR.69.1.H651U2327M86326P
Azizan Marzuki, Iain Hay, Jane James, Public participation shortcomings in tourism planning: the case of the Langkawi Islands, Malaysia Journal of Sustainable Tourism. ,vol. 20, pp. 585- 602 ,(2012) , 10.1080/09669582.2011.638384
J.G. Fábos, Greenway planning in the United States: its origins and recent case studies Landscape and Urban Planning. ,vol. 68, pp. 321- 342 ,(2004) , 10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2003.07.003
Bo-sin Tang, Siu-wai Wong, Milton Chi-hong Lau, Social impact assessment and public participation in China: A case study of land requisition in Guangzhou Environmental Impact Assessment Review. ,vol. 28, pp. 57- 72 ,(2008) , 10.1016/J.EIAR.2007.03.004
Bärbel Tress, Gunther Tress, Scenario visualisation for participatory landscape planning—a study from Denmark Landscape and Urban Planning. ,vol. 64, pp. 161- 178 ,(2003) , 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00219-0
Wanxin Li, Jieyan Liu, Duoduo Li, Getting their voices heard: three cases of public participation in environmental protection in China. Journal of Environmental Management. ,vol. 98, pp. 65- 72 ,(2012) , 10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2011.12.019
Julius Gy. Fábos, Robert L. Ryan, INTERNATIONAL GREENWAY PLANNING: AN INTRODUCTION Landscape and Urban Planning. ,vol. 68, pp. 143- 146 ,(2004) , 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00155-5
Sarah. E. West, Understanding participant and practitioner outcomes of environmental education Environmental Education Research. ,vol. 21, pp. 45- 60 ,(2015) , 10.1080/13504622.2013.879695
Ron Bradfield, George Wright, George Burt, George Cairns, Kees Van Der Heijden, The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning Futures. ,vol. 37, pp. 795- 812 ,(2005) , 10.1016/J.FUTURES.2005.01.003