Yes / Within western cultures, the term `public participation¿ has strong positive connotations, and is associated with the promotion of democracy. The contention of this paper is that these invocations of democracy - although not entirely inaccurate - obscure the varied and tangible effects of public participation on wider policy processes. Drawing on Sharp and Connelly 2001, this paper argues that participation should not be analysed in terms of the type of democracy it invokes, but rather in terms of the extent and nature of its influence on the policy process. In particular, the policy process is examined for conflict between participants over (1) the extent of participation, (2) the nature of participation and (3) the influence of the participation, as well as (4) the outcomes to which it leads. This approach to the analysis of participation is demonstrated through a study of one element of participation in an authority¿s Local Agenda 21 process. The paper concludes that participation is inherently political and practitioners need to act strategically to manage participation in support of progressive agendas.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BRADFORD/oai:bradscholars.brad.ac.uk:10454/1048 |
| Date | January 2002 |
| Creators | Sharp, Liz |
| Source Sets | Bradford Scholars |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Article, Accepted manuscript |
| Rights | © 2002 Taylor & Francis: Routledge. Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy., Unspecified |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds