{"id":3130,"date":"2021-04-11T18:29:57","date_gmt":"2021-04-11T17:29:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/theurbanmycelium.com\/?p=3130"},"modified":"2022-03-23T13:47:39","modified_gmt":"2022-03-23T12:47:39","slug":"the-wheel-of-public-participation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/theurbanmycelium.com\/fr\/the-wheel-of-public-participation\/","title":{"rendered":"The wheel of public participation"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

<\/p>\n

In recent years, we have observed a growing number of participatory democratic mechanisms in cities. Participatory budgets, consultation workshops, or citizen committees are different approaches that all aim to involve citizens in the making of the city<\/a>. Even the political programmes during the last French municipal elections demonstrated a growing concern around \u201ccitizen participation\u201d. However, the objectives behind the politics of participation are not always clear.<\/strong> Why do more and more city stakeholders refer to these participatory processes? For what reasons? <\/strong><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

In the last few years, I have been involved in more than a dozen participatory urban projects, contracted by actors such as municipalities, real estate companies, urban planners, and social housing corporations. Most often, we noted that the root intention behind the participatory approach was not clear for the decision makers. Of course, they had a concrete aim in mind, for example designing the new neighbourhood together with the local community, or creating a shared housing group in an apartment building. But most often there had been no deep discussion beyond these goals, especially regarding:<\/p>\n