The use of digital technologies to enhance traditional public participation processes and to build a new form of a social capital— digital social capital—is being embraced in a range of planning practices. This article presents a discussion of how the digital age is influencing public participation and its implications for building social capital. The article highlights critical concerns to consider when embracing Internet tools for civic engagement and when evaluating such practices. The authors conclude with a call for scholarly research to assess the constraints and opportunities presented by this emergent trend and comparative studies to traditional modes of public participation.
Arango, Tim.2009. Soon, bloggers must give full disclosure. The New York Times. Business Section. October 5, 2009.
2.
Arnstein, Sherry.1996. A ladd of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association35:216-24.
3.
Avenue A Razorfish.2007. Digital consumer behavior study. http://www.razorfish.com/reports/Dig.ConsStudy.pdf (accessed September 3, 2009).
4.
Bourdieu, Pierre.1986. The forms of social capital. In Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, ed. J. Richardson, 241-258. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
5.
Boyd, D.M., and N. Ellison.2007. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13:210-30.
6.
Bugs, Geisa, Carlos Granell, Oscar Fonts, Joaquín Huerta, and Marco Painho.2010. An assessment of public participation GIS and Web 2.0 technologies in urban planning practice in Canela, Brazil . Cities27:172-81.
7.
Carver, Steve, Andrew Evans, Richard Kingston, and Ian Turton.2001. Public participation, GIS and cyberdemocracy: Evaluating on-line spatial decision support systems. Environmental and Planning B: Planning and Design28:907-21.
8.
Castells, Manuel.1989. The informational city: Information technology, economic restructuring and the urban-regional process. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
9.
---. 1996. The rise of the network society. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
10.
---. 1999. European cities, the informational society, and the global economy. New Left Review204:18-32.
11.
---. 2000. Toward a sociology of the network society. Contemporary Sociology29:693-9.
12.
Chadwick, A., and C. May.2003. Interaction between states and citizens in the age of the Internet: Egovernment in the United States, Britain, and theEuropean Union. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions16:271-300.
13.
Christopher, L. Carol.2007. ‘‘Understanding Web 2.0.’’Seybold Report: analyzing publishing technologies7.11, June 14, 2007. https://libproxy.temple.edu:2343/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25485536&site=ehost?live&scope=site (accessed August 13, 2009).
14.
City of Melbourne.2008. Media release: City of Melbourne takes home prestigious planning award. September 20, 2008. http://www.futuremelbourne.com.au/wiki/view/FMPlan/PlanningAward (accessed October 13, 2009).
15.
---. 2009a. Media release: City of Melbourne & City of Sydney Share Major Planning Award, October 31, 2009. http://www.futuremelbourne.com.au/wiki/view/FMPlan/PresidentsAward (accessed October 13, 2009).
16.
---. 2009b. Future Melbourne Wiki Post Implementation Review. City of Melbourne. http://www.futuremelbourne.com.au/wiki/pub/FMPlan/WebHome/Future_Melbourne_Wiki_Post_Implementation_.pdf (accessed September 14, 2009).
17.
Coleman, James S.1988. Social capital and the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology94:S95-120.
18.
Donath, J.S., and D. Boyd.2004. Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal22:71.
19.
Ellison, N., C. Steinfield, and C. Lampe.2007. The benefits of Face-book ‘‘friends:’’ Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites . Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication12:1143-68. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/ellison.html (accessed August 13, 2009).
20.
Evans-Cowley, Jennifer, and Maria Manta Conroy, eds. 2005. E-Government and planning: Key citizen participation issues and applications. Columbus, OH: John Glenn Institute for Public Service and Public Policy. http://hdl.handle.net/1811/519 (accessed October 5, 2010).
21.
Friedman, Thomas L.2006. The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
22.
Goodspeed, Robert C.2008. The Internet as a participation tool. The Goodspeed Update. http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2225 (accessed October 15, 2009).
23.
Gorry, Anthony, G.2009. The New Atlantis, Number 24, Spring 2009 , pp. 116-120.
24.
Graham, Stephen.2004. The cybercities reader. New York: Routledge.
25.
Hall, G. Brent, Raymond Chipeniuk, Robert D.Feick, MichaelG. Leahy, and Vivien Deparday .2010. Community-based production of geographic information using open source software and Web 2.0. International Journal of Geographical Information Science24:761-81.
26.
Hampton, Keith.2004. Netville: Community on and offline in a wired suburb. In The cybercities reader, ed. S. Graham , 256-62. New York: Routledge.
27.
Harrison, Carolyn, and Mordechai Haklay .2002. The potential of public geographic systems in UK environmental planning: Appraisals by active publics. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management45:841-63.
Heinz, John P., Edward O. Laumann, Robert L. Nelson, and Robert H. Salisbury .1993. The hollow core. Private interests in national policy making. Cambridge : Harvard University Press.
30.
Ho, A.T.-K. 2002. Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative . Public Administration Review62:434-44.
31.
Innes, Judith E., and David E. Booher .1999. Consensus building and complex adaptive systems. A framework for evaluating collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association65:412-23.
32.
---. 2003. The impact of collaborative planning on governance capacity . Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Development.
33.
Innes, Judith, Judith Gruber, Michael Neuman, and Robert Thompson .1994. Coordinating growth and environmental management through consensus building. California Policy Seminar . Berkeley, CA: University of California , Berkeley.
34.
Kaylor, Charles.2005. The state of local e-government and e-democracy: Benchmarking the progress of US cities at providing online opportunities for citizen engagement . In E-government and planning: Key citizen participation issues and applications, ed. Jennifer Evans-Cowley and Maria Manta Conroy, 4-15. Columbus, OH: John Glenn Institute for Public Service and Public Policy. http://hdl.handle.net/1811/519 (accessed, October 5, 2010).
35.
Keen, Andrew.2007. The cult of the amateur: How today’s Internet is killing our culture. New York: Broadway Business.
36.
Kraut, R., S. Kiesler, B. Boneva, J. Cummings, V. Helgeson, and A. Crawford.2002. Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues58:49-74.
37.
Laumann, Edward O., and Franz U. Pappi .1976. Networks of collective action . New York: Academic Press.
38.
Leach, William D., and Paul A. Sabatier .2005. Are trust and social capital the keys to success? Watershed partnerships in California and Washington. In Swimming upstream. collaborative approaches to watershed management , ed. Paul A. Sabatier, Will Focht, Mark Lubell, Zev Trachtenberg, Arnold Vedlitz, and Marty Matlock, 233-58. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
39.
LeGates, Richard, and Frederic Stout.2007. Introduction to ‘‘The impact of the new technologies and globalization on cities’’. The City Reader, 4th ed. London and New York: Routledge.
40.
Louisiana Recovery Authority.2007. Media release: Louisiana speaks hits grand slam at state APA planning awards , September 21, 2007. http://lra.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=newsroom&tmp=detail&articleID=131 (accessed October 13, 2009).
41.
Lowdens, Vivien, Lawrence Pratchett, and Gerry Stoker.2001. Trends in public participation: Part 1-Local government perspectives. Public Administration79:205-22.
42.
Lubell, Mark.2004. Resolving Conflict and Building Cooperation in the National Estuary Program. Environmental Management33(5): 677-691.
43.
Lubell, Mark.2007. Familiarity breeds trust: Collective action in a policy domain. Journal of Politics29:237-50.
44.
Mandarano, Lynn.2009. Social network analysis of social capital in collaborative planning. Society and Natural Resources22:245-60.
45.
Markusen, Ann.1999. Sticky places in slippery space: A typology of industrial districts. In The new industrial geography, ed. T. Barnes and M. Gertler , 98-123. London: Routledge.
46.
Mitchell, William J.1999. E-topia. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
47.
---. 2001. E-topia: Urban life, Jim-But not as we know it. Cambridge: MIT Press.
48.
Mosco, Vincent.2004. Webs of myth and power: Connectivity and the new computer technolpolis. In The cybercities reader, ed. S. Graham, 199-204. New York: Routledge.
49.
Mossberger, Karen, and Caroline Tolbert .2005. Improving the citizen-government connection through technology? In E-government and planning: Key citizen participation issues and applications, ed. Jennifer Evans-Cowley and Maria Manta Conroy , 38-47. Columbus, OH: John Glenn Institute for Public Service and Public Policy. http://hdl.handle.net/1811/519 (accessed, October 5, 2010).
50.
Noah, Josie.2009. Louisiana speaks: A case study examining the use of web technologies to engage residents in the planning process. http://www.urbaninsight.com/articles/lascasestudy0409.html (accessed September 14, 2009).
51.
Oregon Metro.2010. Oregon Metro web site. http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=29903 (accessed July 15, 2010).
52.
Owen, Diana.2009. The campaign and the media. In The American elections2008, ed. Jamet M. Box-Steffensmeier and Steven E. Schier , 9-31. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
53.
Pasek, Josh, Eian More, and Daniel Romer.2009. Realizing the social Internet? Online social networking meets offline civic engagement. Journal of Information Technology & Politics6:197-215. http://stanford.academia.edu/JoshPasek/Papers/97409/Realizing_the_Social_Internet_Online_Social_Networking_Meets_Of%EF%AC%82ine_Social_Capital (accessed August 13, 2009).
54.
Putnam, Robert.1995. Tuning in tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in American. Political Science and Politics28:664-83.
55.
---. 2000. Bowling alone. The collapse and revival of American community . New York: Simon & Schuster .
56.
Resnick, P.2001. Beyond bowling together: Sociotechnical capital. In HCI in the new millennium, ed. J. Carroll647-72. New York: Addison-Wesley .
57.
Rheingold, Howard.2003. Online lecture at MIT-Smart Mobs: The next social revolution , November 13, 2003. http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/22/ and http://www.smartmobs.com/ (accessed August 13, 2009).
58.
Rinner, C., and M. Bird.2009. Evaluating community engagement through argumentation maps-A public participation GIS case study. Environment & Planning B: Planning & Design36:588-601.
59.
Roberts, Nancy.2004. Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation . American Review of Public Administration34:325-53.
60.
Rohe, William M.2004. Building social capital through community development . Journal of the American Planning Association70:158-64.
61.
Sassen, Saskia.1991. The global city. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
62.
---. 2004. Agglomeration in the digital era? In The cybercities reader, ed. S. Graham, 195-98. New York: Routledge.
63.
Selwyn, Neil.2004. Reconsidering the political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society6:341-62.
64.
Shah, Dhavan, Nojin Kwak, and R. Lance Holdert .2001. ‘‘Connecting’’ and ‘‘Disconnecting’’ with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital. Political Communication18:141-62.
65.
Seifert, J., and E. Peterson.2002. The promise of all things E? Expectations and challenges of emergent electronic government. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology1:193-212.
66.
Simãoa, Ana, Paul J.Densham, and Mordechai (Muki) Haklay. 2009. Web-based GIS for collaborative planning and public participation: An application to the strategic planning of wind farm sites. Journal of Environmental Management90:2027-40.
67.
Simpson, David.2005. Use of web technology by U.S. Planning Agencies: Results from a National Benchmarking Survey. Excerpt from the Municipal Yearbook. www.urbaninsight.com (accessed July21, 2010).
68.
Schneider, Mark, John Scholz, MarkLubell, Denisa Mindruta, and Matthew Edwardsen .2003. Building Consensual Institutions: Networks and the National Estuary Program. American Journal of Political Science47(1):143-158.
69.
Steinfield, Charles, Nicole B. Ellison, and Cliff Lampe.2008. Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology29:434-45.
70.
Steins, Chris.2009. Top 10 free web applications for planning. Planetizen. http://www.planetizen.com/node/38952 (accessed September 14, 2009).
71.
Stern, Eliahu, Gudes Ori, and Tal Svoray.2009. Web-based and traditional public participation in comprehensive planning: A comparative study. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design36:1067-85.
72.
Susskind, Lawrence, and J. Cruikshank.1987. Breaking the impasse. Consensual approaches to resolving public disputes. New York: Basic Books.
73.
Taylor, Nigel.1998. Urban Planning Theory since 1945. London, UK: Sage.
74.
The Associated Press.2009. Young Obama backers AWOL from health care fight. New York Times, August 24, 1.
75.
Thomas. J.C., and G. Streib.2003. The new face of government: Citizen-initiated contacts in the era of egovernment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory13:83-102.
76.
Wellman, Barry, Anabel Quan Haase, James Witte, and Keith Hampton.2001. Does the Internet increase, decrease or supplement social capital?American Behavioral Scientist45:436-55.
77.
West, D.M.2004. E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review64:15-27.
78.
Wondolleck, Julia M., and Steven L. Yaffee .2000. Making collaboration work. Lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Washington, DC: Island Press.
79.
Zook, Matthew.2004. Cyberspace and local places: The urban dominance of Dot.Com geography in the late 1990s. In The cybercities reader, ed. S. Graham, 205-11. New York: Routledge.
