No weighting for healthy sustainable local planning: Evaluation of a participatory appraisal tool for rationality and inclusivity

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Volumn 56, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 1267-1289

  Grant, Marcus ^a   Barton, Hugh ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

action research; collaborative appraisal; consensus building; environmental impact assessment (EIA); evaluation methods; health impact assessment (HIA); healthy urban planning; sustainability

Indexed keywords

ACTION RESEARCH; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; HEALTH IMPACT; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; LOCAL PLANNING; STAKEHOLDER; SUSTAINABILITY; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; URBAN PLANNING;

ENGLAND; SOMERSET; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84887885772     PISSN: 09640568     EISSN: 13600559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2012.717887     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Allmendinger, P. and Haughton, G. 2007. The fluid scales and scope of UK spatial planning. Environment and planning A, 39 (6): 1478 - 1496. doi: 10.1068/a38230
2. Allmendinger, P. and Haughton, G. 2009. Critical reflections on spatial planning. Environment and planning A, 41 (11): 2544 - 2549. doi: 10.1068/a42227
3. Barker, T. 2008. The economics of avoiding dangerous climate change. An editorial essay on The Stern Review. Climatic change, 89: 173 - 194. doi: 10.1007/s10584-008-9433-x
4. Barton, H. 1995. The capacity to deceive. ECOS, 16 (4): 18 - 25.
5. Barton, H. and Grant, M. 2006. A health map for the local human habitat. The journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 126 (6): 252 - 253. doi: 10.1177/1466424006070466
6. Barton, H. and Grant, M. 2008. Testing time for health and sustainability. The journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 128 (3): 130 - 139. doi: 10.1177/1466424008089800
7. Barton, H. 2011. Spatial planning and health: integrating health into the planning process review 5/6, London: NICE.
8. Bazerman, M. H. 1998. Judgment in managerial decision-making, 4th ed, New York: John Wiley.
9. Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. 1971. The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
10. Bojorquez-Tapia, L. A., Sanchez-Colon, S. and Martinez, A. F. 2005. Building consensus in environmental impact assessment through multicriteria modeling and sensitivity analysis. Environmental management, 36 (3): 469 - 481. doi: 10.1007/s00267-004-0127-5
11. Brown, V. A. 2005. Sustainability and health, London: Earthscan.
12. Carroll, B. 2002. Sustainability thresholds analysis: an approach to inform decision-making: summary guidance for agency staff, London: Environment Agency.
13. Chambers, R. 1994. The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World development, 22 (7): 953 - 969. doi: 10.1016/0305-750X(94)90141-4
14. Chapin, S. 1965. Land use planning, 2nd ed, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
15. CLG. 2009. Multi-criteria analysis: a manual, Wetherby: Communities and Local Government Publications.
16. CLG. 2011. Draft National Planning Policy Framework, Wetherby: Communities and Local Government Publications.
17. Cox, J., Fell, D. and Thurstain-Goodwin, M. 2002. Red man, green man, London: RICS Foundation.
18. DEFRA. 2005. Securing the future: the UK Government Sustainable Development Strategy, Norwich: TSO.
19. DEFRA. 2011. Mainstreaming sustainable development - the government's vision and what this means in practice [online] Available from: http://sd.defra.gov.uk/documents/mainstreaming-sustainable-development.pdf [Accessed 8 March 2012]
20. Devuyst, D. 2000. Linking impact assessment and sustainable development at the local level: the introduction of sustainability assessment systems. Sustainable development, 8 (2): 67 - 78. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1719(200005)8:2<67::AID-SD131>3.0.CO;2-X
21. DH. 2007. Draft guidance on health in strategic environmental assessment: consultation document, London: Department of Health.
22. EEA. 2006. Urban sprawl in Europe: the ignored challenge, Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
23. EEA. 2009. Ensuring quality of life in Europe's cities and towns, Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
24. Figueira, J., Greco, S. and Ehrgott, M. 2005. Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys, Boston: Kluwer Academic.
25. Fiorino, D. 1989. Environmental risk and democratic process: a critical review. Columbia journal of environmental law, 14: 501 - 547.
26. Forester, J. 1989. Planning in the face of power, Berkeley: University of California Press.
27. Frasera, E. D.G. 2006. Bottom up and top down: analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. Journal of environmental management, 78 (2): 114 - 127. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009
28. Gibbons, M. 1994. The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies, London: Sage.
29. Goodstadt, V. 2009. Working across boundaries. Town and country planning, 78 (3): 8
30. Grant, M. Involving the community in selecting indicators: the UK case study, Bristol. Mobility, urban planning and sustainable development strategies for neighbourhood renovation, HQE2R international workshop. September 8-9. [online] Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/9651/ [Accessed 8 October 2012]
31. Grant, M. 2004. Innovation in tourism planning processes: action learning to support a coalition of stakeholders for sustainability. Tourism and hospitality planning & development, 1 (3): 219 - 237. doi: 10.1080/1479053042000306493
32. Gregory, R. 2000. Using stakeholder values to make smarter environmental decisions. Environment: science and policy for sustainable development, 42 (5): 34 - 44. doi: 10.1080/00139150009604888
33. Habermas, J. 1981. The theory of communicative action, Boston: Beacon Press.
34. Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action-reason and the rationalization of society, Boston: Beacon Press.
35. Hajkowicz, S. 2008. Supporting multi-stakeholder environmental decisions. Journal of environmental management, 88: 607 - 614. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.020
36. Hämäläinen, R. P. and Alaja, S. 2008. The threat of weighting biases in environmental decision analysis. Ecological economics, 68 (1-2): 556 - 569.
37. Healey, P. 1992. Planning through debate: the communicative turn in planning theory. Town planning review, 63 (2): 143 - 162.
38. Healey, P. 1996. The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formations. Environment and planning B: planning and design, 23 (2): 217 - 234. doi: 10.1068/b230217
39. Healey, P. 2003. Collaborative planning in perspective. Planning theory, 2 (2): 101 - 123. doi: 10.1177/14730952030022002
40. HMG, 2004. 2004. London: HMSO. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act
41. Hersh, M. A. 1999. Sustainable decision making: the role of decision support systems. IEEE transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics - Part c: applications and reviews, 29 (3): 395 - 408. doi: 10.1109/5326.777075
42. Innes, J. E. 1998. Information in communicative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64: 52 - 63. doi: 10.1080/01944369808975956
43. Khakee, A. 1998. " The communicative turn in planning and evaluation ". In Evaluation in planning: facing the challenge of complexity, Edited by: Lichfield, N. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 97-112.
44. Kozlowski, J. and Hill, G. 1993. Towards planning for sustainable development, Aldershot: Avebury/Ashgate.
45. Kozlowski, J., Hughes, J. T. and Brown, R. 1972. Threshold analysis, London: Architectural Press.
46. Localism Act. 2010. London: TSO.
47. LUC and RTPI. Issues for the practice of sustainability appraisal in spatial planning - a review: final report. Prepared for the Sustainable Development Research Network as part of the Spatial Planning Workstream. London: Land Use Consultants.
48. Malisz, B. 1972. Threshold analysis as a tool in urban and regional planning. Papers in regional science, 29 (1): 167 - 177. doi: 10.1007/BF01962291
49. McGuirk, P. M. 2001. Situating communicative planning theory: context, power, and knowledge. Environment and Planning A, 33 (2): 195 - 217. doi: 10.1068/a3355
50. McLoughlin, B. 1968. Urban and regional planning: a systems approach, London: Faber.
51. Munda, G. 2005. Measuring sustainability: a multi-criterion framework. Environment, development and sustainability, 7 (1): 117 - 134. doi: 10.1007/s10668-003-4713-0
52. Munda, G. 2008. Social multi-criteria evaluation for a sustainable economy, Berlin: Spinger-Verlag.
53. Nadin, V. 2006. The role and scope of spatial planning [online]. Available from: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/rolespatialplanning.pdf [Accessed 14 July 2010]
54. Nadin, V. 2007. The emergence of the spatial planning approach in England. Planning practice and research, 22 (1): 34 - 62. doi: 10.1080/02697450701455934
55. NICE. 2008. Promoting and creating built or natural environments that encourage and support physical activity, London: NHS. NICE public health guidance 8
56. Nowotny, H. 2001. Rethinking science; knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty, Cambridge: Polity Press.
57. POS. 2005. Planning officers society Meeting Notes 26/04/05 [online]. Planning Officers Society. Available from: http://www.planningofficers.org.uk/POS-Library/Notes-of-Meetings/LDF-LDG:-Spatial-Planning---Shaking-off-the-Shackles_298.htm [Accessed 27 September 2012]
58. Posas, P. J. 2011. The UK's Draft Guidance for Health in SEA in light of community priorities and the UNECE SEA Protocol. Environmental assessment review, 31: 320 - 327. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2011.01.002
59. Poston, A., Emmanuel, R. and Thomson, C. Developing holistic frameworks for the next generation of sustainability assessment methods for the built environment. Proceedings of the 26th annual ARCOM conference. September 6-8 2010. Edited by: Egbu, C. pp. 1487 - 1496. Association of Researchers in Construction Management [online] Available from: http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/ar2010-1487-1496_Poston_Emmanuel_and_Thomson.pdf [Accessed 8 October 2012]
60. Rittle, H. W.J. and Webber, M. M. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences, 4: 155 - 169. doi: 10.1007/BF01405730
61. RCEP. 2002. Environmental planning, London: Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution.
62. RPA. 2000. Comprehensive project appraisal: towards sustainability, London: Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.
63. Skollerhorn, E. 1998. Habermas and nature: the theory of communicative action for studying environmental policy. Journal of environmental planning & management, 41: 555 - 573. doi: 10.1080/09640569811452
64. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. and Lichenstein, S. 1977. Behavioural decision theory. Annual review of psychology, 28: 1 - 39. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.28.020177.000245
65. Stern, N. 2007. The economics of climate change: The Stern Review, Cambridge: Cambridge: University Press.
66. Strategic Solutions. 2010. Study of local planning process and health, London: NICE.
67. Taylor, N. 1998. Urban planning theory since 1945, London: Sage.
68. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, London: TSO.
69. Thomson, C. S., El-Haram, M. and Hardcastle, C. 2009. Managing knowledge of urban sustainability assessment. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, engineering sustainability, 162 (ES1): 35 - 43. doi: 10.1680/ensu.2009.162.1.35
70. Tonn, B., English, M. and Travis, C. 2000. A Framework for understanding and improving environmental decision making. Journal of environmental planning & management, 43 (2): 163 - 183. doi: 10.1080/09640560010658
71. WHO. 1997a. City planning for health and sustainable development, Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe. European Sustainable Development and Health Series: 2
72. WHO. 1997b. Sustainable development and health: concepts, principles and framework for action for European cities and towns, Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe. European Sustainable Development and Health Series: Book 1
73. WHO. 2009. Zagreb Declaration for Healthy Cities Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe
74. Wong, C. and Watkins, C. 2009. Conceptualising spatial planning outcomes: towards an integrative measurement framework. Town planning review, 80 (4/5): 481 - 516. doi: 10.3828/tpr.2009.8