Collaborative planning is often mentioned as one of the most appropriate planning theories in relation to the network society owing to its focus on creating fair and inclusive institutional settings for deliberations among public and private stakeholders. Even though this theoretical framework discusses potential outcomes, the actual democratic effects of collaborative planning processes are notably overlooked in the literature. The central question raised in this article is: how can we assess the democratic effects of collaborative planning processes? The article presents a tentative evaluative framework for assessing the different stages (input, process and outcome) of collaborative planning processes deriving criteria from democratic theory, as well as from theories on collaborative planning, which can be deployed for empirical studies.
Abelson, J. and Gauvin, F.-P. (2006) Assessing the Impacts of Public Participation: Concepts, Evidence and Policy Implications. Research Report P/06, Public Involvement Report. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks/Réseaux canadiens de recherche en politiques publiques, Ottawa.
2.
Andersen, J., Christensen, A.-D., Langberg, K., Siim, B. and Torpe, L. (1993) Medborgerskab: demokrati og politisk deltagelse . Herning: Systime.
3.
Bang, H.P. and Sørensen, E. (1998) `The Everyday Maker: A New Challenge to Democratic Governance', paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions, Warwick.
4.
Beetham, D. (1993) Auditing Democracy in Britain, Democratic Audit . Colchester: Human Rights Centre Scarman Trust, University of Essex.
5.
Beetham, D. (1994) Defining and Measuring Democracy. London: SAGE.
6.
Beetham, D. (1999) `The Idea of Democratic Audit in Comparative Perspective' , Parliamentary Affairs52(4): 567-81.
7.
Beetham, D. (2004) `Towards a Universal Framework for Democracy Assessment' , Democratization11(2): 1-17.
8.
Blomgren Bingham, L. and O'Leary, R. (2006) `Conclusion: Parallel Play, Not Collaboration: Missing Questions, Missing Connections', Public Administration Review66(s1): 161-7.
9.
Booher, D. (2004) `Collaborative Governance Practices and Democracy' , National Civic Review93(4): 32-46.
10.
Catt, H. (1999) Democracy in Practice. New York : Routledge.
11.
Collaborative Democracy Network (2005) `A Call to Scholars from the Collaborative Democracy Network', National Civic Review94(3): 64-7.
12.
Connelly, S. and Richardson, T. (2004) `Exclusion: The Necessary Difference between Ideal and Practical Consensus', Journal of Environmental Planning and Management47(1): 3-17.
13.
Connick, S. and Innes, J. (2003) `Outcomes of Collaborative Water Policy Making: Applying Complexity Thinking to Evaluation', Journal of Environmental Planning and Management46(2): 177-97.
14.
Connolly, W.E. (1993) The Terms of Political Discourse. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
15.
Dahl, R.A. (1979) `Procedural Democracy', in J. Fishkin and P. Laslett (eds) Philosophy, Politics and Society, 5th series, pp. 97-133. Oxford : Basil Blackwell.
16.
Dahl, R.A. (1998) On Democracy. New Haven, CT : Yale University Press.
17.
Delli Carpini, M.X., Cook, F.L. and Jacobs, L.R. (2004) `Public Deliberation, Discursive Participation, and Citizen Engagement: A Review of the Empirical Literature', Annual Review of Political Science7: 315-44.
18.
Deutsch, K.W. (1966) The Nerves of the Government. New York: Free Press.
19.
Easton, D. (1971) The Political System. New York : Alfred A. Knopf.
20.
Fischer, F. (2002) Citizens, Experts and the Environment. The Politics of Local Knowledge. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
21.
Fishkin, J. (1995) The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22.
Fishkin, J. (1999) `Review of Dahl, R.A. On Democracy', American Political Science Review93(3): 698-9.
23.
Fraser, N. (1997) `Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the "Post-socialist" Condition', London: Routledge.
24.
Fung, A. (2004) `Deliberation's Darker Side: Six Questions for Iris Marion Young and Jane Mansbridge', National Civic Review93(4): 47-54.
25.
Habermas, J. (1983) Diskursethik: Notizen zu einem Begründungsprogram in Moralbewusstsein und kommunikativens Handeln. Frankfurt : Suhrkamp.
26.
Habermas, J. (1996a) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere . Oxford: Polity Press.
27.
Habermas, J. (1996b) Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge : Polity Press.
28.
Healey, P. (1997) Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. London: Macmillan.
29.
Healey, P. (1999) `Institutionalist Analysis, Communicative Planning and Shaping Places', Journal of Planning Education and Research19(2): 111-21.
30.
Healey, P. (2003) `Collaborative Planning in Perspective', Planning Theory2(2): 101-23.
31.
Healey, P., de Magalhaes, C. and Madanipour, A. (1999) `Institutional Capacity-Building and Urban Regeneration Projects', Futura18(3): 117-37.
32.
Held, D. (1987) Models of Democracy. Oxford : Polity Press.
33.
Hillier, J. (1998) `Representation, Identity, and the Communicative Shaping of Place', in A. Leigh and M.J. Smith (eds) The Production of Public Space, pp. 207-32. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
34.
Innes, J.E. (1998) `Information in Communicative Planning', Journal of the American Planning Association64(1): 52-62.
35.
Innes, J.E. (2004) `Consensus Building: Clarifications for the Critics' , Planning Theory3(1): 5-20.
36.
Innes, J. and Booher, D.E. (1999a) `Consensus Building as Role Playing and Bricolage, Towards a Theory of Collaborative Planning', Journal of the American Planning Association65(1): 9-25.
37.
Innes, J. and Booher, D.E. (1999b) `Consensus Building and Complex Adaptive Systems: A Framework for Evaluating Collaborative Planning', Journal of American Planning Association65(4): 412-23.
38.
Innes, J.E. and Booher, D.E. (2000) `Planning Institutions in the Network Society: Theory for Collaborative Planning. The Revival of Strategic and Spatial Planning' , in W. Sallet and A. Faludi (eds) The Revival of Strategic Spatial Planning , pp. 175-89. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences .
39.
Innes, J.E. and Booher, D.E. (2003) `Collaborative Policymaking: Governance through Dialogue', in M.A. Hajer and H. Wagenaar (eds) Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society, pp. 33-59. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
40.
Karpowitz, C.F. and Mansbridge, J. (2005) `Disagreement and Consensus: The Need for Dynamic Updating in Public Deliberation', Journal of Public Deliberation1(1): Article 2. [On-line version: http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol1/iss1/art2 ]
41.
Khakee,A. (1998) `Evaluation and Planning: Inseparable Concepts' , Town Planning Review69(4): 359-74.
42.
Leach, W.D. (2006) `Collaborative Public Management and Democracy: Evidence from Western Watershed Partnerships', Public Administration Review66(s1): 100-10.
43.
Lord, C. (2004) A Democratic Audit of the European Union. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
44.
Mansbridge, J. (1980) Beyond Adversary Democracy. New York: Basic Books.
45.
March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (1995) Democratic Governance. New York : Free Press.
46.
Margerum, R.D. (2002) `Evaluating Collaborative Planning Implications from an Empirical Analysis of Growth Management', Journal of American Planning Association68(2): 179-93.
47.
Mathur, N. and Skelcher, C. (2007) `Evaluating Democratic Performance: Methodologies for Assessing the Relationship between Network Governance and Citizens', Public Administration Review67(2): 228-37.
48.
Mouffe, C. (2000) The Democratic Paradox. London : Verso.
49.
Nordvig-Larsen, J. (1999) `Citizen Involvement in Community Revitalisation Projects', paper presented at the European Urban Research Association workshop, `Innovation in Urban Governance', NIBR, Oslo, 22-23 April.
50.
Parry, G., Moyser, G. and Day, N. (1992) Political Participation and Democracy in Britain . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
51.
Petts, J. (2001) `Evaluating the Effectiveness of Deliberative Processes: Waste Management Case Studies', Journal of Environmental Planning and Management44(2): 207-26.
52.
Phillips, A. (1995) The Politics of Presence. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
53.
Pitkin, A. (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
54.
Pløger, J. (2004) `Strife: Urban Planning and Agonism', Planning Theory3(1): 71-92.
55.
Saward, M. (2001) `Making Democracy Connections: Political Equality, Deliberation, and Direct Democracy', Acta Politica36(1): 361-79.
56.
Skelcher, C., Mathur, N. and Smith, M. (2005) `The Public Governance of Collaborative Spaces: Discourse, Design and Democracy', Public Administration83(3): 573-96.
57.
Sørensen, E. and Torfing, J. (2005) `The Democratic Anchorage of Governance Networks' , Scandinavian Political Studies28(3): 195-218.
58.
Vedung, E. (1997) Public Policy and Programme Evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers .
59.
Verba, S. and Nie, N.H. (1972) Participation in America. Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper and Row.
60.
Weir, P. and Beetham, D. (1999) Political Power and Democratic Control in Britain . London: Routledge.
61.
Young, I.M. (1996). `Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy' in Benhabib, S. (ed.) Democracy and Difference, pp. 120-35. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
