Pathways of stakeholders’ relations and frames in collaborative planning practices: A framework to analyse relating and framing dynamics

Vandenbussche, Lieselot; Edelenbos, Jurian; Eshuis, Jasper

doi:10.1177/1473095215620150

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 74 publications

(144 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results suggest that participants' perceptions change within the process, and that those changes may involve complex, dynamic, and reciprocal interactions within the collaborative group (Vandenbussche et al 2015). The findings also highlight the influence of external conditions and the importance of stakeholder selection.…”

Section: The Regional Council Is Adequately Representedmentioning

confidence: 61%

Factors influencing successful collaboration for freshwater management in Aotearoa, New Zealand

Cradock-Henry¹,

Greenhalgh²,

Brown³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Public participation in freshwater management has been widely advocated as an effective way to resolve the tensions between contested values and objectives while maintaining ecological integrity. However, questions remain regarding which processes and factors contribute to successful processes and outcomes for freshwater. Using a comparative case-study methodology, we unravel the "noise of participation" to assess the factors that influence the success of participatory decision making in collaborative processes currently underway in Hawke's Bay and Northland, Aotearoa, New Zealand. In Hawke's Bay, participants have been periodically surveyed to solicit their perceptions of how the process is working and the likelihood of achieving desirable outcomes. In Northland, five identical processes are currently underway, one per catchment, providing the basis for an intraregional assessment of collaboration. Our results suggest that participants' perceptions change within the process, and that those changes may involve complex, dynamic, and reciprocal interactions within the collaborative group. Results also show the strong influence of external conditions. The choice of stakeholder participants is also critical to ensuring the viability of collaboration. Key factors include participants' previous interactions and relationships, which may help to prime them for collaboration. These factors are dynamic and evolve through different cycles. Although both collaborative processes are still underway, these insights may help focus greater attention to process design and stakeholder selection from the outset to ensure successful outcomes. Ultimately, a successful collaborative process is one that is able to incorporate feedback and adapt to changing the dynamic and often complex external environment.

show abstract

Section: The Regional Council Is Adequately Representedmentioning

confidence: 61%

Factors influencing successful collaboration for freshwater management in Aotearoa, New Zealand

Cradock-Henry¹,

Greenhalgh²,

Brown³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Urban governance of these interactive, plural and evolving spaces asks for a ‘double shift’ in our thinking, combining a relational ontology with epistemic, methodological and normative assumptions about how to know, analyse and improve relational dynamics (Healey, 2007; Karlsen and Larrea, 2017; Khan et al, 2013; Ison et al, 2014; Paschen and Beilin, 2015; Vandenbussche et al, 2017). First of all, this means recognising the (increased) omnipresence of webs of multiplicity, interdependency and institutional contingencies.…”

Section: Transforming the Relational Dynamics Of Urban Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This relational approach is an attractive way of intervening in 'SIin-the-making' that chimes with a major relational strand of urban studies (MacCallum et al, 2009;Khan et al, 2013;Blokland, 2017;McCann, 2017). Here I draw especially on Doreen Massey's reconceptualisation of "space as the sphere of relations, of contemporaneous multiplicity, and as always under construction" (Massey, 2005, 148) to both  understand space as constituted through the ways local actors negotiate and construct their interdependencies and institutional configurations, and  intervene in these relational dynamics by developing collective capacities for relating to a plurality of knowledge, experiences, values and institutions (Healey, 2007;Fraser and Weniger, 2008;Vandenbussche et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transforming the relational dynamics of urban governance: How social innovation research can create a trajectory for learning and change

Bartels

2020

Urban Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines how social innovation (SI) research can co-produce transformative change in cities. A key challenge is to diffuse and sustain SIs in ways that transform the relational webs that constitute local spaces and their governance. The relational approach to SI is conceptually promising in this respect, but its foundations and practices need to be further developed. Therefore, I develop a relational ‘theory–methods package’ of practice theory and action research. By co-producing immediately usable insights, experiences and artefacts in the daily practice of SI, this approach enables researchers to gradually create conditions for a transformative trajectory of learning and change in urban governance. I critically appraise four research practices in the context of SI in Dutch urban governance and reflect on the transformative potential of this relational theory–methods package.

show abstract

“…Relationships have been identified as a key element of collaborative networks (Hastings, 1996; Healey, 2007; Huxham, 2000; Mandell and Keast, 2007; O’Leary et al., 2012; Romzek et al., 2012; Vandenbussche et al., 2017). Interdependence, informal interactions, face-to-face communication, mutual commitment, trust; all are crucial to “collaborative dynamics” (Emerson et al., 2012: 6).…”

Section: Collaborative Dynamics In Street Level Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative dynamics in street level work: Working in and with communities to improve relationships and reduce deprivation

Bartels

2018

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Joint service delivery is a well-established aspect of urban governance but does not necessarily improve interagency collaboration or reduce socio-spatial deprivation. What happens in interactions between street level workers has a large influence on collaborative processes and outcomes but is remarkably underexplored. This article develops an understanding of the nature and impact of the relational practices enacted in street level collaboration. I argue that community-centred working can foster effective and authentic collaborative processes and, as a result, generate better societal outcomes. Based on a participatory evaluation conducted in Amsterdam, I critically appraise how working in and with communities moved collaborative dynamics in street level work away from habitual routines and power relations that sustained exclusion and inequality of local disadvantaged youngsters towards better internal relationships and less socio-spatial deprivation.

show abstract

Pathways of stakeholders’ relations and frames in collaborative planning practices: A framework to analyse relating and framing dynamics

Cited by 15 publications

References 74 publications

Factors influencing successful collaboration for freshwater management in Aotearoa, New Zealand

Factors influencing successful collaboration for freshwater management in Aotearoa, New Zealand

Transforming the relational dynamics of urban governance: How social innovation research can create a trajectory for learning and change

Collaborative dynamics in street level work: Working in and with communities to improve relationships and reduce deprivation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About