In recent decades, the focus of public participation in urban planning and development has shifted from IF to HOW citizen involvement can be realized. Additionally, diffusion of information and communication technology (ICT) and the recent advancement of mobile devices have altered the ways citizens can interact with others and with their urban environment. This article endeavors to explore and critically discuss the practical potentials and limitations of mobile participation (as an emerging field of electronic participation) based on the example of the FlashPoll app (www.flashpoll.eu). It also debates its possible contribution to a higher level of participation quality.
Key points for practitioners:
This paper elaborates the following points for practitioners: Characteristics of mobile partici- pation, its practical benefits and barriers as well as the contribution of mParticipation in processes of citizens involvement, including quality aspects, challenges and opportunities.
Afzalan,N., & Muller,B. (2014). The Role of Social Media in Green Infrastructure Planning: A Case Study of Neighborhood Participation in Park Siting. Journal of Urban Technology, 21(3), 67-83.
2.
Albrecht,S.Kohlrausch,N.Kubicek,H.Lippa,B.Märker,O.Trénel,M. et al. (2008). eParticipation: Electronic Participation of Citizens and the Business Community in eGovernment: Study on Behalf of the Federal Ministry of the Interior, Division IT, from Institut für Informationsmanagement Bremen GmbH (ifib) and Zebralog: http://www.ifib.de/publikationsdateien/study_e-participation_engl.pdf.
3.
Al-Kodmany,K. (2001). Online tools for public participation. Government Information Quarterly, 18(4), 329-341.
4.
Allmendinger,P., & Tewdwr-Jones,M. (Eds.) (2002). Planning futures: New directions for planning theory. London, New York: Routledge.
5.
American Planning Association. (2006). Planning and urban design standards (1st ed.). Wiley graphic standards. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.
6.
Arnstein,S. R. (1969). A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224.
7.
Booher,D. E., & Innes,J. E. (2002). Network Power in Collaborative Planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21(3), 221-236.
8.
Burby,R. J. (2003). Making Plans that Matter: Citizen Involvement and Government Action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(1), 33-49.
9.
Çalışkan,O. (2012). Design thinking in urbanism: Learning from the designers. URBAN DESIGN International, 17(4), 272-296.
10.
Campbell,S. W., & Kwak,N. (2010). Mobile Communication and Civic Life: Linking Patterns of Use to Civic and Political Engagement. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 536-555.
11.
Castells,M. (1989). The informational city: Information technology, economic restructuring, and the urban-regional process/Manuel Castells. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
12.
Chadwick,A. (2011). Explaining the Failure of an Online Citizen Engagement Initiative: The Role of Internal Institutional Variables. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 8(1), 21-40.
13.
Chetkow-Yanoov,B. (1982). Citizen participation in city planning. Habitat International, 6(1–2), 165-178, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0197397582900571.
14.
Connick,S., & Innes,J. E. (2003). Outcomes of Collaborative Water Policy Making: Applying Complexity Thinking to Evaluation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 46(2), 177-197.
15.
Davidoff,P. (1965). Advocay and Pluralism in Planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31(4), 331-338.
16.
Day,D. (1997). Citizen participation in the planning process: An essentially contested Concept? Journal of Planning Literature, 11(3), 421-434.
17.
Desouza,K. C., & Bhagwatwar,A. (2012). Citizen Apps to Solve Complex Urban Problems. Journal of Urban Technology, 19(3), 107-136.
18.
Desouza,K. C., & Bhagwatwar,A. (2014). Technology-Enabled Participatory Platforms for Civic Engagement: The Case of U.S. Cities. Journal of Urban Technology, 21(4), 25-50.
19.
Deva,B.Garzon,S. R., & Küpper,A. (2016). FlashPoll: A Context-Aware Polling Ecosystem for Mobile Participation. In 19th International Conference Innovation in Clouds, Internet and Networks (March 1–3, 2016, Paris) (pp. 169-176).
20.
Dienel,H.-L.Vergne,A.Franzl,K.Fuhrmann,R. D., & Lietzmann,H. J. (Eds.) (2014). Blickwechsel: Vol. 11. Die Qualität von Bürgerbeteiligungsverfahren: Evaluation und Sicherung von Standards am Beispiel von Planungszellen und Bürgergutachten. [Stuttgart], München: Steiner; oekom.
21.
Drohsel,K. M.Fey,P.Höffken,S.Landau,S., & Zeile,P. (2010). Mobile Applications in Urban Planning. In GeelhaarJ.EckardtF.RudolfB.ZieroldS., & MarkertM. (Eds.), MediaCity. Interaction of Architecture, Media and Social Phenomena, (pp. 499-522).
22.
Ertiö,T. (2013). M-participation: the emergence of participatory planning applications (RESEARCH BRIEFINGS No. 6b). Turku, Finland: The City of Turku Administration. Retrieved October 10, 2016, from http://www.turku.fi/Public/download.aspx?ID=180546&GUID={874B60D1-6962-4B14-8760-6BA744A2C409}.
23.
Ertiö,T. (2015). Participatory Apps for Urban Planning – Space for Improvement. Planning Practice & Research, 30(3), 303-321.
24.
Ertiö.T., & Ruoppila,S. (2014). Supporting ‘Participation’ in Mobile Participation. In JanssenM. (Ed.), Innovation and the Public Sector: volume 21. Electronic government and electronic participation. Joint proceedings of ongoing research, posters, workshop and projects of IFIP EGOV 2014 and ePart 2014, (pp. 3-12).
25.
Evans-Cowley,J. (2010). Planning in the Real-Time City: The Future of Mobile Technology. Journal of Planning Literature, 25(2), 136-149.
26.
Evans-Cowley,J., & Hollander,J. (2010). The New Generation of Public Participation: Internet-based Participation Tools. Planning Practice and Research, 25(3), 397-408.
27.
Fainstein,S. S. (2005). Planning Theory and the City. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25(2), 121-130.
28.
Farman,J. (2012). Mobile interface theory: Embodied space and locative media. New York, NY: Routledge.
29.
Fathejalali,A. (2017). Enhancing citizen engagement in urban planning processes through mobile participation (mParticipation). Berlin.
30.
Flashpoll (2015). A Manual for Successful Mobile Participation, from nexus, Institute for cooperation management and interdisciplinary research: http://www.flashpoll.eu/documents/10184/16940/Flashpoll-Handbook.pdf/bd63209d-97d3-4a26-96d0-9ac2d266adb4.
31.
Friedmann,J. (1987). Planning in the public domain: From knowledge to action. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
32.
Frith,J., & de Souza e Silva,A. (2012). Mobile interfaces in public spaces: Locational privacy, control, and urban sociability. New York: Routledge.
33.
Geissel,B., & Newton,K. (2012). Evaluating democratic innovations: Curing the democratic malaise? New York: Routledge.
34.
Giddens,A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
35.
Glass,J. J. (1979). Citizen participation in planning: the relationship between objectives and techniques. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(2), 180-189.
36.
Gohde-Ahrens,R. (2013). Partizipation und soziale Inklusion aus der Quartierssicht: – ein Blick nach Hamburg, from Netzwerk Bürgerbeteiligung: http://www.netzwerk-buergerbeteiligung.de/fileadmin/Inhalte/PDF-Dokumente/newsletter_beitraege/nwbb_beitrag_gohde_ahrens_130320.pdf.
37.
Gordon,E. (2008). Towards a theory of network locality. First Monday, 13(10). Retrieved June 20, 2018, from http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2157/2035.
38.
Gordon,E., & de Souza e Silva,A. (2011). Net locality: Why location matters in a networked world. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
39.
Habermas,J. (1985). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society. The theory of communicative action: Transl. by Thomas MacCarthy; Vol. 1. Boston: Beacon.
40.
Harvey,D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
41.
Healey,P. (1996a). The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formations. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 23(2), 217-234.
42.
Healey,P. (1993). Planning Through Debate: The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory. In FischerF. & ForesterJ. (Eds.), The Argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning, (pp. 233-253). Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.
43.
Healey,P. (1996b). Planning Through Debate: The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory. Town Planning Review, 63(2), 143-162.
Hillier,J. (2002a). Direct Action and Agonism in Democratic Planning Practice. In AllmendingerP. & Tewdwr-JonesM. (Eds.), Planning futures. New directions for planning theory (pp. 110-135). London, New York: Routledge.
46.
Hillier,J. (2002b). Shadows of power: An allegory of prudence in land-use planning. The RTPI library series. London, New York: Routledge.
47.
Höffken,S. (2015). Mobile Partizipation: Wie Bürger mit dem Smartphone Stadtplanung mitgestalten. Zugl.: Kaiserslautern, Techn. Univ., Diss. Lemgo: Rohn.
48.
Höffken,S., & Streich,B. (2011). Engaging the Mobile Citizens – How Mobile Devices Offer new Ways of Civil Engagement. In SchrenkM.PopovichV. V., & ZeileP. (Eds.), REAL CORP 2011. Change for stability : lifecycles of cities regions, the role and possibilities of foresighted planning in transformation processes : proceedings of 16th International Conference on Urban Planning, Regional Development and Information Society, 18–20 May 2011 SANAA building, Zollverein World Heritage Site, Essen, Germany (pp. 269-274). Schwechat: CORP, Competence Center of Urban and Regional Planning.
49.
Höffken,S., & Streich,B. (2013). Mobile Participation. In SilvaC. N. (Ed.), Citizen E-Participation in Urban Governance (pp. 199-225). IGI Global.
50.
Innes,J. E. (1995). Planning Theory’s Emerging Paradigm: Communicative Action and Interactive Practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 14(3), 183-189.
51.
Innes,J. E., & Booher,D. E. (2004). Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(4), 419-436.
52.
Irvin,R. A., & Stansbury,J. (2004). Citizen Participation in Decision Making: Is It Worth the Effort? Public Administration Review, 64(1), 55-65.
53.
Kanhere,S. S. (2011). Participatory Sensing: Crowdsourcing Data from Mobile Smartphones in Urban Spaces. In 2011 12th IEEE International Conference on Mobile Data Management (MDM), pp. 3-6.
54.
Katz,J. E., & Aakhus,M. (Eds.) (2002). Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Laurian,L. (2004). Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making: Findings from Communities Facing Toxic Waste Cleanup. Journal of the American Planning Association, 70(1), 53-65.
57.
Lenhart,A.Ling,R.Campbell,S., & Purcell,K. (2010). Teens and Mobile Phones. Retrieved June 24, 2018, from Pew Research Center Internet & Technology: http://www.pewinternet.org/2010/04/20/teens-and-mobile-phones/.
58.
Light,B., & Cassidy,E. (2014). Strategies for the suspension and prevention of connection: Rendering disconnection as socioeconomic lubricant with Facebook. New Media & Society, 16(7), 1169-1184.
59.
Lüttringhaus,M. (2000). Stadtentwicklung und Partizipation: Fallstudien aus Essen Katernberg und der Dresdner Äusseren Neustadt. Beiträge zur Demokratieentwicklung von unten: Nr. 17. Bonn: Stiftung Mitarb.
60.
Macintosh,A. (2004). Characterizing e-participation in policy-making. In Proceedings, p. 10.
61.
Macintosh,A. (2006). eParticipation in Policy-making: the research and the challenges. In CunninghamM. & CunninghamP. M. (Eds.), Information and communication technologies and the knowledge economy: Vol. 3. Exploiting the knowledge economy. Issues, applications and case studies, Amsterdam [u.a.]: IOS Press, pp. 364-369.
62.
Mandarano,L.Meenar,M., & Steins,C. (2010). Building Social Capital in the Digital Age of Civic Engagement. Journal of Planning Literature, 25(2), 123-135.
63.
Mannarini,T., & Fedi,A. (2010). The Quality of Participation in the Perception of Citizens: Findings from a Qualitative Study. In LangeN. & WagnerM. (Eds.), Community psychology. New developments, New York, NY: Nova Science, pp. 177-192.
64.
Netzwerk Bürgerbeteiligung (2013). Qualitätskriterien Bürgerbeteiligung. Netzwerk Bürgerbeteiligung. Retrieved June 24, 2018, from http://www.netzwerk-buergerbeteiligung.de/fileadmin/Inhalte/PDF-Dokumente/Qualita%CC%88tskriterien/nwbb_qualitaetskriterien_stand_februar2013.pdf.
Osborne,S. P.Radnor,Z., & Strokosch,K. (2016). Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A suitable case for treatment?Public Management Review, 18(5), 639-653.
67.
Pinch,T. J., & Bijker,W. E. (1987). The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other. In BijkerW. E.HughesT. P., & PinchT. J. (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems. New directions in the sociology and history of technology, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 17-50.
68.
Potapchuk,W. R. (1996). Building sustainable community politics:Synergizing participatory, institutional, and representative democracy. National Civic Review, 85(3), 54-59.
69.
Potapchuk,W. R., & Crocker,J. P. (1999). Exploring the Elements of Civic Capital. National Civic Review, 88(3), 175-202.
70.
Prahalad,C. K., & Ramaswamy,V. (2004). Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy & Leadership, 32(3), 4-9.
71.
QM Moabit West. (2013). Integriertes Handlungs- und Entwicklungskonzept 2013, Berlin: S.T.E.R.N. Gesellschaft, from http://www.moabitwest.de/uploads/media/IHEK_FINAL_MW_2013_01.pdf.
72.
Rios Insua,D., & French,S. (2010). E-Democracy: A Group Decision and Negotiation Perspective. Advances in group decision and negotiation: Vol. 5. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
73.
Roberts,N. (2004). Public Deliberation in an Age of Direct Citizen Participation. The American Review of Public Administration, 34(4), 315-353.
74.
Rowe,G., & Frewer,L. J. (2005). A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms. Science, Technology & Human Values, 30(2), 251-290.
75.
Schinkel,U.Jain,A., & Schröder,S. (2014). Introduction. In SchinkelU.JainA., & SchröderS. (Eds.), Book series Future megacities: Vol. 4. Local action and participation. Approaches and lessons learnt from participatory projects and action research in future megacities,. Berlin: Jovis, pp. 13-17.
76.
Schrock,A. R. (2015). Communicative Affordances of Mobile Media: Portability, Availability, Locatability, and Multimediality. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1229-1246.
77.
Schröder,C. (2014). Some reflections on possible uses of E-participation for the local level. In ParycekP. & EdelmannN. (Eds.), CeDEM14: Conference for E-Democracy an Open Government, Donau-Universität, pp. 535-540.
78.
Schweitzer,L. (2014). Planning and Social Media: A Case Study of Public Transit and Stigma on Twitter. Journal of the American Planning Association, 80(3), 218-238.
79.
Selle,K. (2013). Mitwirkung mit Wirkung? Anmerkungen zum Stand der Forschung über planungsbezogene Kommunikation und das, was von ihr bleibt. Planung Neu Denken, (2/3), 19.
80.
Senate of Berlin. (2010). Neighborhood Management in Berlin: Information on the program “Socially Integrative City”. Retrieved Nov. 2015, from Department for Urban Development: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/wohnen/quartiersmanagement/download/qm_broschuere_en.pdf.
81.
Send,H.Ebert,J.Friesike,S.Gollatz,K., & Schildhauer,T. (2014). Online Mit-machen und Entscheiden – Partizipationsstudie 2014. Berlin: Alexander von Humboldt Institut für Internet und Gesellschaft. Retrieved May 16, 2018, from https://www.hiig.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/20140609_Studie_DIGITAL.pdf.
82.
Shilton,K. (2012). Participatory personal data: An emerging research challenge for the information sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(10), 1905-1915.
83.
Shin,Y., & Shin,D.-H. (2012). Community Informatics and the New Urbanism: Incorporating Information and Communication Technologies into Planning Integrated Urban Communities. Journal of Urban Technology, 19(1), 23-42.
84.
Shirky,C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York: Penguin Press.
85.
Silva,C. N. (Ed.) (2013a). Citizen E-Participation in Urban Governance: IGI Global.
86.
Silva,C. N. (2013b). Open Source Urban Governance. In SilvaC. N. (Ed.), Citizen E-Participation in Urban Governance, IGI Global, pp. 1-18.
87.
Stivers,C. (1990). The Public Agency as Polis: Active Citizenship in the Administrative State. Administration & Society, 22(1), 86-105.
88.
Tambouris,E.Macintosh,A.Coleman,S.Wimmer,M.Vedel,T.Westholm,H. et al. (2007). Introducing eParticipation. Retrieved April 05, 2015, from DEMO_net: http://www.ifib-consult.de/publikationsdateien/Introducing_eParticipation_DEMO-net_booklet_1.pdf.
89.
Vanobberghen,W.van der Graaf,S.Custodio,A., & Tommis,M. (2013). Smart City Service Creation and the Living Lab Approach: Benefits & Challenges. EU Platfrom for Intelligent Cities-EPIC. Retrieved June 19, 2018, from http://www.epic-cities.eu/sites/default/files/documents/EPIC%20Smart%20City%20Services%20&%20Living%20Labs%20-%20White%20Paper.pdf.
90.
Winstanley,D.Sorabji,D., & Dawson,S. (1995). When the pieces don’t fit: A stakeholder power matrix to analyse public sector restructuring. Public Money & Management, 15(2), 19-26.
