Abstract
Widely used and disseminated, Arnstein’s ladder is considered a reference for citizen participation. It, nevertheless, involves a recurrent bias and a certain confusion when confronted with projects in the Belgian and French working-class districts of cross-border Hainaut. Characterised by fundamentally opposed management systems (one bureaucratic and hierarchical, the other democratic or even delegative), these worksites challenge Arnstein’s concepts and allow us to understand that information is not a level in the participation ladder, but the condition for the functioning of the whole system. Likewise, they also teach us that manipulation and delegation are not opposite extremes but can percolate in any level of participation. Finally, they reveal that the interlocking of powers and the interplay of stakeholders can easily turn the established participation mechanism from exemplary to revolting and vice versa.
Highlights
Architecture and urban planning have historically been what we call in French “un fait du Prince”, in the sense of a strong and centralised power [1]
The concept of need is questioned. This principle of need is formalised by the constructional norms developed by modernist standardisation, which still has an impact on architecture and urban planning today
Pre-existing materials from the Belgian associative world will be compared with new materials from the Interreg project “Réseau Hainaut Solidaire”. This new data allow us to compare a system of participation based on administrative management (Belgian) with another based on popular education (French)
Summary
Architecture and urban planning have historically been what we call in French “un fait du Prince”, in the sense of a strong and centralised power [1]. The mechanisms of participation have essentially developed in both fields since the 1960s, attempting to give users a place to adapt architecture to their expectations. The (non-explanatory) concept of need is questioned. This principle of need is formalised by the constructional norms developed by modernist standardisation, which still has an impact on architecture and urban planning today. It is still necessary to know what is meant by participation. In the USA, based on their own experience in urban planning, as well as their involvement in an NGO, Sherry
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
