Informal democracy in Patras, Greece: A mechanism for improved planning?

Abstract

Greek spatial planning reality faces the problems like sprawl and illegal settlements outside the building zones, underpinned by the conventional self-financed real estate development model under the patronage of the national government. In case of transportation congestion problems, the formal planning proved to be even more ineffective and unpopular. Therefore, non-institutionalized supplement to formal planning is considered highly effective: informal planning relies upon the principles of collaborative dialogue, networks and trustful relationships among the relevant players. The article describes the informal planning procedurethe test planning methodanalyzed against the theoretical background of communicative rationality, on the one hand, and critically assessed through the practical implementation in the case of Peloponnesian city of Patras on the other. As a result, the article highlights the successful phases of the test planning, nevertheless pointing to its shortcomings, which could be expected in the societies with a dominant political cronyism. Highlights:•Effective coordination makes the core of informal planning procedures.• Communicative rationality principles coincide with a nature of informal planning.• Informal planning affects a long-term process of the planning culture change.

Squandering the territorial capital in the Balkans? Urban megaprojects between global trends and local incentives

“…The planning practice is dominated by "the bureaucratic administrative culture, encouraging reliance on narrow disciplinary expertise unable and unwilling to cope with the increasingly complex spatial problems" Papamichail and Peric 2018, p. 335). As a result, professionals cannot do much to restrict close feedback between developers and politicians, hence, repeatedly posing crises for effective spatial development (Papamichail and Peric 2018;Komninos 2014;Zifou 2015).…”

Informal planning: a tool towards adaptive urban governance

“…The informal system taps the insight of diverse social experience to improve practical judgments about complex problems. Planning in such settings embraces the conventions of deliberative democracy linking small group discourse with scientifically informed causal and interpretive analysis of problems and solutions (Papamichail and Perić, 2018). th ISOCARP World Planning Congress Jakarta-Bogor, Indonesia International Society of City and Regional Planners…”

“…Taking into consideration the discussed socio-economic challenges, current spatial problems in such environments flow from the complexity of decision-making among hierarchical levels of political and economic competition among private firms (developers, lenders, investors, land owners), households (owners, renters), political organizations (political parties, advocacy groups, non-profits) and public officials (elected, administrators, professionals) (Papamichail and Perić, 2018). All these agents make plans, but the ensuing decisions are neither transparent nor coordinated.…”

“…Instead of focusing on actions of control, informal planning focuses on those whose actions shape the future consequences of spatial development (e.g., the flooding, the traffic, etc. ), as well as those who will bear most of these consequences (Papamichail and Perić, 2018). Current formal planning structures usually limit people in these respective social positions and locations apart.…”

“…The collaboration is democratic and focused on deliberation among these participants. The payoff is not increased power, but purposeful criticism on reciprocal learning processes to conceive and compare problems and solutions for a place that combines causal assessment and political judgment (Briassoulis, 1997;Scholl, 2017;Papamichail and Perić, 2018).…”