The following paragraphs will discuss some of the prevalent tools and techniques used in the participatory planning process being undertaken by various authorities across the world. Public participation has a vast theoretical and practical tools and techniques. Let’s look at some of the tools and techniques for public participation discussed in the document of (European Union Water Directors’ Meeting, 2002).

Citizens Jury/ Citizen Advisory Committee

Group of 12-20 randomly selected citizens, gathered in such a way as to represent a microcosm of their community, who meet over several days to deliberate on a policy questions. They are informed about the issue, hear evidence from witnesses and cross-examine them. They then discuss the matter amongst themselves and reach a decision through consensus.

Strengths of this technique are many It creates informed, active, engaged citizenry and promotes common good as a societal objective. It promotes self-transformation and development and provides opportunities to introduce new perspectives and challenge existing ones. It helps in consensus building and promotes communication between governments and governed. It also brings legitimacy and democratic control to non-elected public bodies

Weaknesses of the technique are fewer than benefits. There is no formal powers; lack of binding decision accountability to act upon decision /recommendation. It is exclusive – only a few individuals participate.Potential problems lie in initial stages of preparation (i.e., jury selection, agenda setting, witness selection) – these have to do with representation (who participates?) responsiveness (what jury is asked to do); and information transfer (how jury is informed?)

The technique can be recommended for use when sponsoring organization are clear about what issues it wants to address, how much it can spend on process, and whether it can follow through on the advice. It is better for focused questions about concrete issues, than on large scale issues and should be part of a wider public involvement strategy.The development of the agenda should be overseen by an advisory board made up of key stakeholders

Planning Cells/Committees

This technique is similar to a citizens’ jury in form and function. It is sponsored by local or national governing authorities to help with the decision making process. Discussions/deliberation takes place in Cells of about 25 participants in size. Results are articulated in a report that is presented to the sponsor, the media, and any other interested group. Local/national sponsor has to agree to take decisions into consideration.

This technique is good for small size of individual cells and its non-intimidating nature allows for innovative ideas and active participation. Participants represent all citizens and not special interest groups. Anyone in the population has a chance of being selected to be a part of this process. It makes decision makers more accountable because they have to defend their position resulting decisions are frequently implemented.Weaknesses of the technique are that problems are defined by local authority and only useful for problems in need of unique decisions. Decisions not always feasible and it becomes hard to keep bias out of information dissemination process.It can be used when other methods fail to resolve a conflict. It is best in situations that require a quick response to an urgent issue where there are a number of possible decisions that can be made.

Workshops and Seminars

The authority or the consultants invites the stakeholders. Usually 2-6 hour workshop is held. The authority or the consultants talk about their plans and proposals and seek the opinion of the participants in writing or oral.Strengths of the technique are that it can be used effectively for communicating information about the plans and proposals. It is useful method for obtaining informed opinions from stakeholders.Weakness of the technique is that it is exclusionary process as selected participants are invited for the workshop or seminar. There is ambiguity in the process of selection of stakeholders and participant for the workshop. It is recommended as a tool for encouraging discussionand deliberation, but needs to be used with much caution because of the problems associated with it.

Deliberative Polling

It builds on the opinion poll by incorporating element of deliberation. It involves larger numbers than citizen’s juries and may involve less time. It measures what public would think if it was informed and engaged around an issue.Strength of the Technique is that it provides insights into public opinions and how people come to decisions. It helps in seeking informed opinions, does not force people to reach consensus.Weakness of the Technique is that it requires a lot of preparation time.Although sample size is large and random, ensuring representativeness is difficult. It is recommended for drawing insight into public opinion and helps useful input into public decision processes.Best suited to issues with options and about which the public is not knowledgeable.

Citizens Panels

It consists of statistically representative sample of residents in a given area. Most comprise several thousand citizens who represent the general population of an area. Panel views are regularly sought using a survey instrument (e.g. postal, telephone surveys).It is anexpensive and effective way to learn about citizens’ needs and preferences. Panel data can be analyzed for multiple purposes and disaggregated for sub-level analysis (i.e. ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic, geographic area).Weakness of the Technique is that there is exclusivity of participant selection process. Consultation agenda determined by decision-making body (i.e. top down) and under-representation of hard-to-reach groups who refuse to participate.Due to the expense as well as the design, the panel is best suited for the development of major community wide policy documents. Limit to new policy areas, where community opinion and policy direction have yet to be determined and mobilization has not yet occurred.

Focus Groups

It is a onetime discussion of a particular topic. It involves 6-12 individuals selected to meet specific criteria in order to broadly represent a particular segment of society. One-time face-to-face meeting structured to be informal to encourage open discussion among participants.Successful focus group may lead to consensus and feelings of enrichment among participants. It provides good venue for learning about needs of a particular group. It remains largely informal, so participants can discuss issues in relaxed atmosphere. It is a good way to gauge the opinions of the public.Lack of informed participants produces superficial discussion. Selection criteria can create bias in eliciting opinions. Limited number of participants limits representativeness of opinions. There is always potential for ideas expressed to be influenced/shaped by interaction/exchange with others.It can be a tool for encouraging discussion and deliberation, but needs to be used with much caution because of the problems associated with it.

Surveys

This is a process of soliciting information from a given representative sample of citizens through questionnaires. Same questions are asked of ever individual surveyed. There are a variety of survey types: postal, interviewer, telephone.It helps in soliciting information from representative sample of citizens. Same questions are asked of ever individual surveyed and thus results represent the ground realities. There are a variety of survey types: postal, interviewer, telephone.The lists may not be representative or comprehensive. Questions need to be somewhat simple and straightforward. Survey results are often not comparable. The effectiveness of surveys is affected by the rates of response. Fundamental decisions have to be made before the survey begins which limits the scope.As it is a time consuming process, it is not a good method if quick results are required. It can be used during the beginning phases of a study (useful in detecting issues that need to be addressed).

Public Hearings

It is a form of public meeting limited in size. It tends to involve only interested citizens and usually experts.It has great potential to inform citizens and potential for improved decision making. It helps in minimizing the conflicts.It may be dominated by special interest groups and feed-back obtained from this format needs to be treated carefully because it may not be representative of the community. It leads to exclude the inarticulate and perhaps disadvantaged groups. It is recommended when there is a pre-submission phase which allows the public time to become familiar with the issues. This process has been used more frequently as the number of the complaints are increasing day by in the public offices for various planning projects. The expert members are better equipped to handle such hearings.

Open Houses

The public is invited to drop by at any time at a set location on a set day(s) and times. They can speak with staff, view the displays set up in the room and break into small discussion groups.The technique provides a relaxed atmosphere for discussion and debate. It enables staff to tailor responses according to the needs/questions of the publicThere is potential for lack of clarity in purpose and it is staff-resource intensive exercise which needs trained facilitators to co-ordination the various conflicting interest groups and helping them reach for consensus after the deliberations and discussions.

Citizen Advisory Committee

It can be made up of a variety of different organizations (e.g. from governmental to public). It is intended to represent the broader public.If committee is balanced, deliberations can be fruitful. Their advice should influence decision making process. Informed citizens can boost trust in institutions and reduce conflict.It may not be a representative group of people but comprises of the expert members of the community and the government agencies undertaking planning process.

Referenda

It is a process wherein an issue is put to popular vote. It can be initiated by governmental or other organizations, or sometimes the citizenry. Results may or may not be considered binding.It incites discussion and interest in public. It is a way to learn public views and way to get citizens directly involved with the legislative process. All voters have equal influence. It can potentially involve all members of a local or national populationResults may not be representative if there is low voter turnout Limited number of times you can use it. It has potential for undue influence if one organization has greater resources than another when campaigning for or against a proposed referendum.

Here is the recapitulation of the important points regarding the various tools and techniques of public participation in the table given below.

Table 2‑1 Comparative Tables for Various Techniques for Participation

Source: Compiled from European Union Water Directors’ Meeting, 2002

The above table no. 2.1 gives us some details on the level of participation, their major nature and character of participation process and finally authors has suggested their uses at various stages of public participation processes like informing, consulting and resolution of the differences i.e. consensus building. The choice of the various tools and techniques of the public participation depends on various factors like nature of the participation, scale of the planning, understanding of the needs, expertise and capacity of the authority and agency undertaking such initiative, provisions of the guidelines and the willingness of the authority to engage public in what manner.

In context of urban development, we will use the tools and techniques adopted in Master Plans and City Development Plans. This will form the basis for our study and further adaptation for Local Area plans. Hence, we will discuss the following tools and techniques will be dealt in greater details in the succeeding chapter.

1. a) Objections and Suggestions
2. b) Stakeholders Participation
3. c) Workshop Based Methods

It has been a great experience exploring the various terms and definitions related to public participation and the minor distinction among them. From the definitions discussed above we have reached to a consensus that participatory planning a process of engaging various stakeholders and empowering them so as to make them an integral part of the process of information sharing and decision making through the process of consensus building and other forms of consultations.

While discussing the various methods of the public participation which evolved over time and which had been popular during some period of time under the prevailing socio-economic and political conditions. For the purpose of plan preparation, we have come to conclusion that the prevalent techniques and tools that can be effective used and which is being used in various planning exercises like open house discussion, workshops and seminars, invitation for objection and suggestion and stakeholders’ consultation with experts are more relevant.

Shashikant Nishant Sharma

Urban Planner

{Courtesy: Sharma, S.N. (2012), Participatory Planning in Plan Preparation: A Case of Delhi, Graduate Thesis, Department of Physical Planning, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi}

Consultation should be as exhaustive as possible like engaging all residents, service providers, public agencies, planning and governing bodies, NGOs and CBOs. Consultation must be interactive like focus group discussion, citizen’s advisory committees. Method of hearing people’s concerns should be open house and concerned persons should be informed at least a week prior to hearing. Methods of inputs of the citizen’s views should be multi-media i.e., written, audio, visual. Ground for consideration of a view should be made clear like the issues pertaining to slum and vendors will be entertained if clamant is registered.

SWOT Analysis can be undertaken for identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats with as much public involvement as possible.  This step can build on the information and findings from the neighborhood inventory and ground realities mapping stage.  Participants in the SWOT analysis should have the chance to review this information, discuss it with others, and provide meaningful feedback.  Depending on the situation, this might be accomplished with a series of workshops where people have the chance to review information, talk together and share ideas.  At this point in the process, all suggestions by the participants should be considered relevant.  There will be opportunities later to prioritize and focus resources.

Workshop facilitation for ensuring that a well-planned workshop goes well, even if it does not go as planned.  A facilitator is a neutral guide that helps the group stay on task, encourages participation, keeps the discussion fair and balanced, and ensures that all voices are heard. All workshops need some form of facilitation. A workshop might need at least one facilitator for every 8-10 participants.

There are several methods to facilitate the prioritization of issues, illicit information or gain group consensus. For example, polling retrieves anonymous and instantaneous quantitative input from a large group of people.  Everyone in a workshop can be asked to respond to simple multiple-choice questions.  Each question can be displayed on a screen with a list of possible responses to facilitate simultaneous response recording through electronic medium or on paper.  A summary of everybody’s response is then immediately available on the screen for everybody to see and further discuss.

A vision can take many forms and one possibility is a vision statement, which captures the desires and aspirations of the community in a manner that is brief enough to be easily communicated but rich enough to be meaningful.  The larger and more complex a community is, the more difficult this step might be.  The vision helps guide the rest of the process.  The vision might focus the process on a particular path, or it might confirm the need to make the process more comprehensive.  This step requires a mix of creative input and careful writing.  If possible, one workshop might be conducted to collect ideas for a vision from a broad range of participants.  Following this workshop, a small working group might spend time crafting a vision from the ideas gathered.  A second workshop should then take place for the public to review the vision.  It might be necessary to repeat this step until a satisfactory vision is obtained.

Drafting Goals and Objectives can build on a vision to create more detailed priorities for a community.  Goals are typically specific and measurable achievements that if met, suggest that significant progress is being made towards the vision.  Objectives are a series of smaller steps that need to be accomplished in order to meet each longer-term goal.  Goals should be developed with significant levels of public involvement, though the process might also call for smaller working groups that can work over a period of time on more details.  Objectives are another more detailed level that might be best accomplished in a series of session with smaller working groups or dedicated staff time.  In either case, when completed, the goals and objectives should be presented to the community in a draft form so that feedback can be gathered and changes made.

Implementation Strategies are another detailed part of the plan that should be constructed with a combination of public input and work from a core group of individuals, including representatives from the community, organizational staff, and perhaps individuals from outside the community who can provide information about efforts and experiences elsewhere.  The list of implementation strategies should be fairly exhaustive so that it includes many possible means to achieve the goals.  However, it should also provide focus so that the organizations and individuals taking responsibility for implementing the plan have clear directions.

Shashikant Nishant Sharma

Urban Planner

{Courtesy: Sharma, S.N. (2012), Participatory Planning in Plan Preparation: A Case of Delhi, Graduate Thesis, Department of Physical Planning, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi}

1.1.1 INTRODUCTION

Master plan 2021 defines Local Area Plan (LAP) as a plan of a ward/sub zone to be prepared and approved by the concerned local body. Municipal Corporation of Delhi has proposed the development of LAP for 33 wards. Every LAP will incorporate the views and local knowledge provided by people living in and around the area. Thus public participation is an essential element of LAP.

“Local area plan is by definition a plan based on the local needs and characteristics. Thus, it requires framing area specific objectives.” (Preparation of local area plans, request for proposals, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, 2005)

“Local area plan means the plan of a ward/sub-zone to be prepared by the concerned body.” (Master plan for delhi-2021, 2007)

“Local area plan means the plan of a ward/sub-zone of existing built up areas where redevelopment / renewal / rejuvenation etc. are to be done with public participation to achieve the ultimate goal of planned development at the macro level.” (Manual for preparation of local area plans based on mpd-2021, area planning unit, Delhi Development Authority, 2008)

1.1.2     STATEMENT ON LAP IN DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS

“It is prepared in consultation with the local community and members of the public. It sets out a strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of an area. The plan seeks to provide a framework for how a ward/local area can develop. It provides some ideas as to how this development can be achieved, what new developments are needed, where public and private resource inputs are required, and some of the rules and regulations that will guide development in the ward” (Manual for preparation of local area plans based on mpd-2021, area planning unit, Delhi Development Authority, 2008).

“To address ground realities and formulate practically enforceable building bye-laws, it will be necessary to focus on much smaller areas with more or less uniform character and concerns. In other words, formulating area specific building bye-laws will require institutionalizing a third level of planning in Delhi whereby detailed, area specific, three dimensional local area plans and building bye-laws are prepared.” (Preparation of local area plans, request for proposals, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, 2005)

Thus, it is quite clear that Local Area Plan will be formulated to address the ground realities in consultation with public to develop and channelize development in accordance with the higher order plans

1.1.3     STAGES OF PLAN PREPARATION AND SCOPE FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Here, we will be discussing the various stages of the Local Area Plan and how public participation is feasible at the various stages proposed by the planning committee for local area plan.

Figure 4‑12 Stages of Local Area Plan in Delhi which is being followed

Source: Term of Reference of the Local Area Plan Preparation

1.1.4     Base Maps

 Here consultants have to generate upto date base maps on the base of SOI data, imagery, revenue maps, approved layout plans etc. Then generate supplementary upto date base maps of services, in terms of water, sewerage, drainage, electricity, fire etc.And then get base map approved by Monitoring Committee and WardCouncilor.

1.1.5     Mapping Of Secondary Data On Base Maps

• On base map, superimposition of up to date MPD/ZDP land use proposals.
• Mapping of heritage buildings, sites and landscapes of national and regional importance to be protected and those to be conserved as per the list of INTACH and/or MCD are to be done in this stage.
• Mapping of approved BPL sites earmarked for in-situ upgrading/reconstruction.
• Mapping of LalDora boundaries of urbanized villages if available is to be done.
• Mapping of any other approved Land Use commitments is to be incorporated.
• Get base map with above commitments approved by Monitoring Committee and WardCouncilor before its publication.

1.1.6     Draft Lap

• Prepare draft ward level proposals (redevelopment wards, redensification wards, densification wards as the case may be) w.r.t MPD/ZDP, the 12th schedule of the CA Act’92, and other primary and secondary data as necessary.
• Draft plan to incorporate land use proposals, permissible uses matrix and Development Control Regulations.
• Weightage will be given to the consultative/ participatory process.
• Draft plan will have to get passed by Monitoring Committee and WardCouncilor before processing under the DD Act’/MCD Act for further improvement.

1.1.7     Final Lap

After considering draft objections/suggestions, prepare final LAP for acceptance by Monitoring Committee for processing through DD Act’57/MCD Act 57.

1.2       INFERENCES

Local Area Plan has been undergoing a phase of completion and the time has opportune to make a review of the planning practices undertaken in the name of participatory planning. The success and failure of a planning exercise has a strong influence on the subsequent planning process. After reviewing the whole process till the draft stage, it has been found that there is limited scope defined for participation in the planning document and in actual practice it failed short of the expectation of the people. The process adopted for involving the public seems more like the customary objections and suggestions process which is undertaken for higher order plans. The engagement of the public has be very limited and it stated after the plan got prepared leaving little scope for incorporation of the views of the public in the planning process. There was lack of efforts in informing public in an effective manner and subsequently involving them in plan preparation process. The interest of public is high in local area plans which will have direct impact on the future development and the provision of services and thus, people will be willing and participate more actively. There was provision for ensuring public consultation for the stakeholder’s participation but in very few cases there was any form of public consultation organized. There was no any monitoring provision by the monitoring authoring to monitor such meetings or workshops.

Shashikant Nishant Sharma

Urban Planner

{Courtesy: Sharma, S.N. (2012), Participatory Planning in Plan Preparation: A Case of Delhi, Graduate Thesis, Department of Physical Planning, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi}

Delhi is a large city-state with area of 1483 sq km and a population of 16.7 millionwhere more than two third of its area as urban. Rest of the area is fast urbanizing.For a city like this the planning process is challenging and magnitude of problems is enormous. It should be noted that Municipal Corporation of Delhi initiated projects of preparation of ‘Local Area Plan’ for 36 wards through various planning consultants to address planning issues and problems on identifying the ground realities.Development in Delhi is guided by the Master Plan 2021 and various Zonal Development Plans. The increase in urban population as a whole and increased migration to Delhi has led to a number of planning and development issues as land are a scarce resource in Delhi bounded by other states having their own development controls and guidelines. In order to counter the ill-effects of urban problem diagnosis and rational planning model, the planners and policy makers of Delhi started to engage public in various states of planning and plan implementation in various forms and degrees. The engagement of public in planning has stated long back in 1962 when the first Master Plan for Delhi was prepared. Even after 50 years of planning for people the planners and policy makers thought for evolving planning with people approach in planning and this culminated in Delhi in the form of concept of Local Area Plan. In 2005, pilot project for the preparation of Local Area Plan got initiated and got completed and the result was not satisfactory and again in 2010 pilot project for the preparation of Local Area Plan started and by 2012 it got completed. It should be noted that Delhi is one of the Indian city to have a Master Plan and Zonal Plans for guiding and controlling the urban growth and development. The need of the people and demand for the development goes hand in hand and this lead to the participation of the public in the plan making process so as to entertain their grievances and make them partner in the development.

Public participation can be materialized only when the public is capable enough to express his views and empowered to participate in the working of the local governance and this was envisaged by the policy planners long ago. In this direction, the enactment of 73^rd and 74^th amendment to the Constitution is noteworthy. The amendments were made to ensure decentralization of planning, planning at local level initiated to empower local people to take action and participate in various stages of plan preparation and plan implementation. This very act led to the planning and development by local bodies by themselves.

Planning at lower level cannot be comprehensible before knowing about the decentralization. Decentralization can be perceived as a process of devolution of power, responsibilities, functions and finances to the local bodies. The primary objective of decentralization programs is to improve resource allocation and service delivery by bringing decision making process closer to the citizens. Participatory planning is part of the decentralisation process and it aims to identify the critical problems, joint priorities, and adoption of various socio‐economic development strategies for the development and welfare of the community. As stated by Olthelen (1999), participatory planning is the initial step in the definition of a common agenda for development by a local community and an external entity or entities. Over the period, this initial step is expected to evolve for the parties concerned towards a self‐sustaining development planning process at the local level. The great authors have presented their views on the need for greater public participation and the nature of such participation for optimal utilization of the aspirations and the expertise of the local people for whom planning is being carried on.

Arnstein often quoted article “Ladders of Citizen Participation” that “the idea of citizen participation is like eating spinach: no one is against it as it is good for you”. But question arises whether citizen participation is serving some purpose or it is just for custom in planning exercise. There is considerable confusion about what looks like in practice, and little consensus about what exactly citizen participation is supposed to be accomplish (Day, 1997). Kweit and Kweit (1981) assert this confusion is mirrored in the attempts empirically evaluate citizen participation programs. Furthermore, Catanese (1984) states that the problem with the public participation is that, it is difficult to know how to carry it out effectively because there are no specific goals. But I will take public participation in one field say Urban Planning they it might be somewhat easy to devise some mechanism for assessing the public participation.

Participatory planning involves conducting planning with the involvement of a number of people. These people can be a whole range of different stakeholders, and it obviously depends on the nature of the thing we are trying to develop or refine, and the context as to who should be involved. The role of the consultant in this process is that of facilitator and coach.There is a general consensus for increasing public participation in the process of planning and development and this has been substantiated time and again by a number of national and international policy making bodies. In this regards we can see the provisions of the Indian Constitution and United Nations sponsored Millennium Development Goals.

Citizen participation is a part of our constitutional provisions and democratic heritage. People should share in decisions affecting their destinies. People participation, involving the constituents in the politico-administrative and planning processes, means their needs and aspirations are heard and mainstreamed in the development agenda. Empowerment of citizens and their involvement in the decision-making processes, from central to local level, is regarded as vital for supporting pro-poor policies, improved service delivery, poverty reduction, and the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

The participatory role of civil society groups with government and planning agencies has evolved over recent years. Citizens groups, Community based organizations (CBOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have become active participants in national and local development planning activities and the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies, programs, and projects. People participation should starts at the grassroots level and should work in harmony for fostering needs-based local planning activities.

Shashikant Nishant Sharma

Urban Planner

(Courtesy: Sharma, Shashikant Nishant (2012), Participatory Planning in Plan Preparation: A Case of Delhi, Graduate Thesis, Department of Physical Planning, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi)

The intensity of the interaction between a city and its neighbouring towns and villages declines rapidly with distance from the city. Thus, people from nearby villages, within a distance of four to five kilometres, may commute daily to the city for work, shopping, education or entertainment. Farther away, a decline in the number of people commuting to the city (in both absolute as well as relative terms as well as in the frequency of movement of individuals to the city is noticed. Beyond a certain distance, which varies from city to city and is dependent on modes of transportation, daily movements are replaced by weekly or even irregular movements until ultimately such movements to the city become rare or absent. Apart from the effect on daily or periodic commuting to the city, the effect is also seen in the distribution of goods and services from the city to the surrounding villages. Similarly, the quantum of milk, vegetables, flowers and so on, coming to the city from the villages is also subjected to distance decay. Similar effect will be noticed in case of hospital patient’s or students attending school. The distance decay effect extends from the city to the outer limits of the city region. At this point the quantum of interaction becomes insignificant.

Though the social distance between urban and rural elite is substantial, Indian cities today play a major role in changing the social and economic environment of the villages. There is greater interaction between the city and the village than ever before and this interaction continues to increase. The city today serves as focal point for development in education and health and even for rural development. The spread of banking from cities to the rural areas was a remarkable achievement of the 1970s. In the process, rural wealth has been mobilized for development. The role of cities and small towns in bringing about the Green Revolution cannot be denied. The city is seen as a key element in regional development planning in India today. The city region is an area around the city over which the city exercises a dominant influence in relation to other neighbouring cities of equal importance. The structure of a city region is complex. It consists of a series of area of influence and area of dominance, apart from sets of smaller city regions which nest within it. There are three basic notions in relation to the structure of the city region which will help you in understanding it better.