Jul 16, 2022
In General Discussion
Half a century ago, prophets such as Arnstein (1969) used the "participation ladder" to remind everyone that some participation is only tokenism. The actual effect is the real issue. Arnstein's "ladder" is a paradigm shift in pan-public management disciplines such as urban planning, heritage preservation, indigenous peoples' rights and politics, regional development, forests, resources, and disaster prevention since the 1970s. Among them, in the face of increasingly complex and difficult Image Manipulation Service governance problems, Fung (2006) developed a "Democracy Cube" that provides three aspects of participation: Who is invited and who can participate? Who has a say? What is the decision process? Is it for reference? Or a meaningful discussion? Policy influence ability, whether participants come from the public sector or the private sector, what is the impact of the decisions made? The above three points can be brought into any public decision-making field that you and I are familiar with. Finally, the XYZ axis is connected to draw a square. The fuller and taller the square, the higher the level of participation, and the flatter the square, and vice versa. 2 Photo Credit: Fung, A. (2006), Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. Public Administration Review, Fung's Democracy Cube provides a three-dimensional examination of the participation process. time dimension of participation More importantly, I think that, regardless of the scale, the participation of users of urban space must also add a "time dimension". Historically speaking, a hundred years is not too old for a city. Urban forms, urban textures, streets and alleys, and neighborhood spaces are not completed by planning and construction. The meaning of creation is the user's entry, use, adaptation, and change and adjustment, so that it will multiply in the daily life trajectory layer by layer.