Public Participation in Planning as Urban Citizenship: Contrasting Two Conceptualizations of Citizenship in Toronto’s Ward 20

Abstract

In the past four decades public participation has become widespread in urban planning and more generally in urban governance because it is believed that outcomes that result from deliberation and dialogue are better and more just, and because decisions that follow consultation are believed to have more legitimacy. In planning for redevelopment, participation may be particularly crucial because established communities are disrupted. However, ‘public participation’ is a difficult concept to nail down. Participatory processes are defined and implemented in flexible ways that can empower residents but can also constrain their ability to meaningfully engage with decision-making. This paper argues that public participation in planning decisions represents an exercise of urban citizenship, and different conceptualizations of citizenship underlie differences in how planners and residents engage in participatory processes. Through a comparison of planners’ and residents’ understanding of public participation in redevelopment decisions in Toronto’s Ward 20, a ‘limited’ and ‘expansive’ conceptualization of urban citizenship are contrasted. The former conceptualizes urban citizenship in terms of knowledge-sharing within a broader governance system and emphasizes citizens’ responsibility to participate. The latter seeks to expand democracy by claiming a partial ‘right to the city’.