The interface between the public, the politician and the professional planning in plan-making exercises

Abstract

Deliberative democracy theorists argue that inclusive processes of stakeholder engagement generally result in more rational and more legitimate policy outcomes when compared to other conventional approaches of decision-making. Examination of inclusive stakeholder engagement processes undertaken in the development of spatial urban planning documents reveals that a tension exists between the process of inclusive stakeholder engagement and the implementation of policy outcomes. Literature on deliberative democracy suggests that both a top-down and bottom-up approach to decision-making will help reconcile that tension by drawing upon the legitimating roles that the public, the professional planner and the politician bring to the process of plan-making. What is missing however is literature which describes the change that occurs in the relationship between these three groups. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to explore how the literature on deliberative democracy describes the relationship between the public, the politician and the professional planner in the plan-making process. By examining the interface between these three main groups of stakeholders questions emerge regarding how the change in relationship between the groups affects the quality of the policy outcome