東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Evaluating Public Participation Tech...

Ambrose, Zachary T.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Evaluating Public Participation Techniques: Improving the Planner's Tool Box.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Evaluating Public Participation Techniques: Improving the Planner's Tool Box./
作者:	Ambrose, Zachary T.
面頁冊數:	63 p.
附註:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 52-01.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International52-01(E).
標題:	Urban planning. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1542309
ISBN:	9781303268274

Evaluating Public Participation Techniques: Improving the Planner's Tool Box.
Ambrose, Zachary T.

Evaluating Public Participation Techniques: Improving the Planner's Tool Box. - 63 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 52-01.

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2013.

This thesis attempts to examine the variety of public participation techniques used in the creation of neighborhood plans and suggests a multi-criteria analysis to compare techniques against a set of criteria. To pair down the participation techniques studied in this thesis, the researcher used well-known techniques currently in use by planning practitioners. These include: the public hearing, the community workshop, the charrette, the focus group, the citizen panel / community advisory board, ballots or referenda, and crowdsourcing. A multi-criteria analysis is proposed as a means of examining the relative performance of each participation technique against a set of external criteria. Based on the extensive research on public participation and theory, five goals have been identified in conducting a public participation process and include a combination of process-based and outcome-based goals to reflect the nature of public participation itself as both a process and an outcome. Goals are understood as general ends or expected results for a project or process. For the purposes of this thesis, public participation goals identified by Laurian and Shaw (2008) will be used and include mutual learning, democratic process, issue-related, governance, and social outcomes. From these goals, 13 criteria are suggested to evaluate each public participation techniques' effectiveness. Criteria, are understood as measureable aspects of judgment by which a dimension of the various choice possibilities under consideration can be characterized (Voogd 1983). The researcher has suggested criteria based on previous research and theory in an attempt to achieve the predefined goals. The evaluator estimates effectiveness scores for each participation technique based on informed judgment; these scores are based on a ten point (0-10) scale and indicate how well each participation technique fulfills each criterion. Additionally, a criterion weighting mechanism is suggested to account for various interested parties' influence and preference. By weighting criteria, individual parties' values are considered and determine the importance of each criterion. Once weighting is achieved, the weights are multiplied against the effectiveness scores to achieve weighted effectiveness scores. These weighted effectiveness scores are totaled for each participation technique and the result indicates the overall effectiveness of each technique relative to the others. An illustrative model is presented to demonstrate how this type of evaluation can be used in a real world setting and considers a neighborhood planning scenario. This illustration identifies the steps used in a multi-criteria evaluation as applied to public participation techniques and suggests further research opportunities and limitations of this type of evaluation.

ISBN: 9781303268274Subjects--Topical Terms:

2122922
Urban planning.

Evaluating Public Participation Techniques: Improving the Planner's Tool Box.
LDR:03689nmm a2200277 4500 001 2065390
005 20151205151935.5
008 170521s2013 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781303268274
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI1542309
035 $a AAI1542309
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Ambrose, Zachary T. $3 3180082
245 1 0 $a Evaluating Public Participation Techniques: Improving the Planner's Tool Box.
300 $a 63 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 52-01.
500 $a Adviser: Donald Miller.
502 $a Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2013.
520 $a This thesis attempts to examine the variety of public participation techniques used in the creation of neighborhood plans and suggests a multi-criteria analysis to compare techniques against a set of criteria. To pair down the participation techniques studied in this thesis, the researcher used well-known techniques currently in use by planning practitioners. These include: the public hearing, the community workshop, the charrette, the focus group, the citizen panel / community advisory board, ballots or referenda, and crowdsourcing. A multi-criteria analysis is proposed as a means of examining the relative performance of each participation technique against a set of external criteria. Based on the extensive research on public participation and theory, five goals have been identified in conducting a public participation process and include a combination of process-based and outcome-based goals to reflect the nature of public participation itself as both a process and an outcome. Goals are understood as general ends or expected results for a project or process. For the purposes of this thesis, public participation goals identified by Laurian and Shaw (2008) will be used and include mutual learning, democratic process, issue-related, governance, and social outcomes. From these goals, 13 criteria are suggested to evaluate each public participation techniques' effectiveness. Criteria, are understood as measureable aspects of judgment by which a dimension of the various choice possibilities under consideration can be characterized (Voogd 1983). The researcher has suggested criteria based on previous research and theory in an attempt to achieve the predefined goals. The evaluator estimates effectiveness scores for each participation technique based on informed judgment; these scores are based on a ten point (0-10) scale and indicate how well each participation technique fulfills each criterion. Additionally, a criterion weighting mechanism is suggested to account for various interested parties' influence and preference. By weighting criteria, individual parties' values are considered and determine the importance of each criterion. Once weighting is achieved, the weights are multiplied against the effectiveness scores to achieve weighted effectiveness scores. These weighted effectiveness scores are totaled for each participation technique and the result indicates the overall effectiveness of each technique relative to the others. An illustrative model is presented to demonstrate how this type of evaluation can be used in a real world setting and considers a neighborhood planning scenario. This illustration identifies the steps used in a multi-criteria evaluation as applied to public participation techniques and suggests further research opportunities and limitations of this type of evaluation.
590 $a School code: 0250.
650 4 $a Urban planning. $3 2122922
650 4 $a Area planning & development. $3 3172430
690 $a 0999
690 $a 0341
710 2 $a University of Washington. $b Urban Design and Planning. $3 2101304
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 52-01(E).
790 $a 0250
791 $a Master's
792 $a 2013
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1542309