Abstract
Enhancing the role of citizens in shaping places has been a longstanding objective for governments, communities and the academy. Although a range of techniques has been developed by the state to give people an opportunity to get involved, these methods often struggle to create a meaningful way to communicate aspirations for places on citizens' terms. In this paper, we document the design, deployments and evaluation of a new technological device that enabled participants to share place views and aspirations beyond more traditional government engagement methods. The device, called JigsAudio, is an open-source device fabricated by the authors that encourages people to express themselves creatively through drawing and talking. The research contributes to our understanding of how accessible and free technologies can reduce barriers to participation, whilst encouraging creativity and expression when talking about the future of places. It goes on to discuss the potential of devices such as JigsAudio conceptually and practically within urban and regional change, and considers the balance that needs to be struck between utilising smart technology whilst creating accessible and meaningful opportunities that inspire citizens.
Highlights
Understanding how to enhance the citizen voice in urban and regional change has been a longstanding concern of both the planning profession and the academic discipline (Arnstein, 1969; Forester, 1982)
When pursuing or undergoing urban change, citizens are vital as they experience everyday life in neighbourhoods and live with the consequential impact of changes, giving them a unique perspective to observe, comment upon and offer suggestions for the future (Baker et al, 2007)
Only a small proportion of citizens engage with urban change through the planning system (Conroy and Evans-Cowley, 2006)
Summary
Understanding how to enhance the citizen voice in urban and regional change has been a longstanding concern of both the planning profession and the academic discipline (Arnstein, 1969; Forester, 1982). These difficulties include trading off the costs and time required to participate and citizens accessing the often complex language of planning (Baker et al, 2007) For these reasons, only a small proportion of citizens engage with urban change through the planning system (Conroy and Evans-Cowley, 2006). Often termed ‘traditional’ in the literature, include writing letters and attending public meetings but these present their own barriers (Wilson et al, 2019) Alongside these difficulties, communities are often involved too late in urban planning debates, when development plans are already in place (Baker et al, 2007). The paper ends by discussing the potential of informal consultation methods, and whether they can open up new modes of dialogue that surpass more traditional participatory methods, allowing for richer responses than are currently elicited
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 callMore From: Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
