An Empirical Evaluation of an Experimental Public Planning Jury. Louise O'Hara, Brunel University College, UK; and Peter Allen, Robens Institute, University of Surrey, UK
Purpose of the Paper
This paper presents an empirical
evaluation of a method of public participation in planning i.e.
a public planning jury. Findings from the study are discussed
in the context of a number of problems common to many participation
techniques.
Introduction
Recent planning guidance and legislation
in the UK (for example the 1991 Town and Planning Regulations),
has emphasised the importance of actively involving local people
in planning and development. To date however, the nature and
extent of public input is generally left to the discretion of
local authorities. In general, the only public input is through
formal systems of consultation and objection. Many communities
no longer find this level of involvement acceptable and expect
local government to be more open and to provide new lines of communication.
The participation techniques described
in the literature are many and varied. One key reason why "the
experts" may be against father involvement of lay-people
in the planning process is the lack of technological knowledge.
What is needed therefore is a method of participation in which
participants have access to this information. Public planning
juries may provide one solution to this problem. Public planning
juries are a consultation exercise in which a random group of
lay-people is presented with technical information about a planning
application, and with a number of key arguments for and against
the application. The group then go on to make informed decisions
about the application based on this information and their own
value judgements.
Although there is much literature
presenting guidelines for running various public participation
programmes there is little presenting empirical evaluations of
such techniques. particularly in the UK. Researchers have a tendency
to focus on outcomes rather than on process. Understanding of
the process is, however critical in order to be able to run a
successful participation programme.
The representativeness of individuals
chosen to take part in participation exercises has been identified
as a key problem in participation techniques. A solution to this
problem was proposed in this study. It was argued that a more
representative measure of public values might be obtained by carrying
out a survey of local views and presenting this information, as
part of the technical evidence, to participants.
Objectives
The three main objectives of the
study were as follows:
Method
The experimental planning jury was
based on a local controversial planning application. Eleven jurors
were recruited from an advertisement in a local paper. The jury
was held over one day. In the morning jurors were introduced
to the project and the jury and were then given presentations
comprising information both for and against the proposal and also
comprising information about locals views. In the afternoon jurors
discussed the presentations and came to a decision as to whether
the application should be accepted or not.
Knowledge and general attitude to
the application were measured before and after the event. Jurors
also completed short questionnaires before and after the event
and after each presentation. These comprised some general questions
about the presentations and a scale concerned with the relative
importance of a number of key issues concerning the application
such as the number of new jobs the plant might bring.
Results and Discussion
Self reported knowledge and general
attitude towards the application had improved following the jury.
Whereas the majority were against the application prior to the
event, following it all but three were in favour of it. Observed
changes in responses to the scale, on key issues followed a common
sense pattern. Following the negative presentation the importance
attached to harms increased. Following the positive presentation
the importance attached to harms decreased. The presentation
on public values bad a clear impact on the jury since following
it the amount of importance attached to harm increased to reflect
the public fears
Participants were asked whether they thought the planning jury was a useful method of participation and all agreed that it was.
Conclusions
The criteria for success in this study focused on process, outcomes and on judgements about feasibility and acceptability by the participants. It could be argued that the experimental jury was a success when judged on these criteria. One ma or problem which has been identified in participation is the representativeness of participants. This study has demonstrated and empirically evaluated one possible solution to this particular problem. In order to fully investigate the utility of this technique, however, it needs to be assessed in real life on-going siting dispute. In addition, as one participant pointed out, unless the jury is given some sort of official clout the exercise will be futile.