Federica Leone on "Participation between utopia and reality. The case study of Sardinian Regional Landscape Plan"

1. Participation between utopia and reality.
The case study of Sardinian Regional
Landscape Plan
Federica Leone1
1 Doctoral Candidate, University of Cagliari, Italy

2. Objectives and structure of presentation
Goals
1. Comprehension of difficulties to translate theoretical participatory
approaches into a real planning process.
2. Analysis of main factors that influence the success of a participatory
process.
3. Understanding the gap between an ideal well-participated plan and a real
one.
Framework
1. Methodology.
2. Normative and pragmatic paradigms of participation.
3. The case study of Sardinian Regional Landscape Plan.
4. Analysis of data.
5. Conclusions.
Page 2
Participation between utopia and reality Page 2

3. Methodology
General Research questions
Selection case study (Sardinian RLP)
Collection of relevant data Semi-structured interviews:
members of the academic field and officials
of the regional government
Self-completion questionnaires:
officials of local governments, members of
environmental organizations and
associations, building firms and professionals
Analysis and interpretation
Semi-structured interviews:
of data
thematic analysis
Self-completion questionnaires:
statistical analysis
Findings /Conclusions
Page 3
Participation between utopia and reality Page 3

4. Normative and pragmatic paradigms
of participation
Antecedent
The coexistence of different interests, needs and expectations has entailed a
widespread crisis for regional and urban planning. Participation could represent
the response to handle the dicothomy between State and community.
Normative approach defines participation as a democratic right. Indeed, it
represents:
1. a priority of public institutions and government at any level;
2. a statutory right in the Aarhus Convention;
3. a caracteristic of good governance.
Pragmatic approach concerns participation as a means to improve the
decision quality. Within a participatory process, different practical issues should
be considered:
1. in what phase, an inclusive process should begin;
2. identification of participants;
3. definition of a methodology;
4.Pageanalisys of power relationships.
4
Participation between utopia and reality Page 4

5. The case study of Sardinian Regional
Landscape Plan
Elaboration phase
1. co-planning conferences;
2. participants: local municiapalities, provinces,
organizations and associations relating to
industry, commerce and craft;
3. a plan proposal exists before;
4. Sardinia Territory
Revision phase
1. Operative and informal meetings called
“landscape workshop”;
2. participants: coastal local municipalities,
provinces and other public authorities;
3. presence of a group of facilitators;
4. Sardinia Territory
Source: www.homeinsardinia.com
5. Sardinia Geoblog
Page 5
Participation between utopia and reality Page 5

6. Analysis of data: political and administrative issues
Elaboration phase
1. Imbalanced power relationships: strong regional government and weak
local municipalities;
2. regional governments aims at establishing its supremacy over the planning
choices;
3. local municipalities conceive the participatory process as external and
fruitless
Revision phase
1. Absence of a real culture about the participatory practices;
2. incapacity to implement a theoretical methodology in an efficient way;
3. unidirectional dialogue between regional government and local
municipalities;
4. low level of participation owing to a probable distrust towards regional
government.
Page 6
Participation between utopia and reality Page 6

7. Analysis of data: management and organizational
issues
Identification of participants
It has been absolutely inappropriate in both the elaboration and revision phases
for two reasons:
1. exclusion of some important stakeholders;
2. officials of local municipalities do not represent the community’s interests
and needs in a proper way.
Stage of planning process
The participatory process has been conducted when a strong plan proposal has
already been elaborated exclusion of some important stakeholders;
Time questions
In the elaboration phase the timing has not been sufficient; meanwhile in the
revision process, it has been excessive.
Financial problems
the regional government has not spent sufficient financial resources to train up
officials of local municipalities, to conduct informative and awareness
campaigns about the plan’s principle and about the reasons of some planning
choices in both elaboration and revision phases
Page 7
Participation between utopia and reality Page 7

8. Analysis of data: technical issues concerning tools
and approaches
Elaboration phase
1. The co-planning conferences have been conducted in very formal way;
2. no real methods or techniques of participation have been used;
3. Sardinia Territory has been a useful informative tool but it has not
guarantee a real participation
Revision phase
1. The approach has not been really advanced;
2. The tool Geoblog has not been a success due to probable distrust towards
regional government and lack of time;
3. unidirectional dialogue between regional government and local
municipalities;
4. Sardinia Territory has been a useful informative tool but it has not
guarantee a real participation
Page 8
Participation between utopia and reality Page 8

9. Conclusions
1. Participatory processes have been based on quantitative interests rather
than qualitative value
2. Strong impact of political issues on planning process in the elaboration
phase
3. In the revision phase the political influences seem less significant.
However, this more attention to participation could be ensued by a specific
intent
4. In the elaboration and revision phases the communication flow has been
one way
5. Understanding problems and needs of local community is a complex task.
For this reason, it is necessary a cooperation between political, technical
and social components.
Page 9
Participation between utopia and reality Page 9