The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar

A Theory for Explaining Levels of Participation in Architecture Based on the Logic of Decision-making Processes for The Built Environment

https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2024.451444.5589
Volume 21, Issue 135
September 2024
Pages 63-76
The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar

Document Type : Original Research Article

Authors

Mohammad Nourani Sadoddin 1
Ghasem Motalebi 2

1 Ph.D. Candidate in Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Faculty of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Iran.

Abstract
Problem statement: Most of the existing theories of participation in the fields related to the built environment, refer to external theories in politics, sociology, or economics, to apply their explanatory foundations. Unrelated theoretical roots have created various disconnected branches in the field, causing many confusions and insufficiencies. Developing explanatory theories inside the fields related to the built environment can resolve this problem. Accordingly, this study has proposed this question: “What are the distinguishable and evaluable shared concepts that can explain the substance of participation in decision-making for the built environment?”
Research objective: To develop an applicable and examinable framework, which can explain the main components of participatory decisions, considering the substance of such decisions in the fields related to the built environment.
Research method: This research was conducted in four phases by using a qualitative method which is based on the logical argumentation strategy. The steps included: 1. Proposing a definition that includes the main concepts and components of participation and decision-making in the fields related to the built environment 2. Explaining three main components of the proposed definition and leveling each of the three components in an assessable way 4. Examining the explanatory model that explains the relations among the components. 
Conclusion: It is possible to explain the substance of participation in the fields related to the built environment based on two concepts of “Decision Cycles” and “Cultural-Epistemic-Praxis Units” and by three components: “Process of participatory decision-making,”  “Distribution of the power of decision making,”  and “Communication among the participants.” The total level of participation in such decisions can be estimated using three criteria: the level of spontaneity in the decision-making processes, the level of communication in decision-making, and the level of power distribution in decision-making.

Keywords

Architectural Theory
Participatory Architecture
Participatory Decision Making
Built Environment
Cultural-Epistemic-Praxis Unit
Albrecht, J. (1988). Towards a Theory of Participation in Architecture—An Examination of Humanistic Planning Theories. Journal of Architectural Education, 42(1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1988.10758507
Alexander, C., Neis, H. & Alexander, M. M. (2012). The battle for the life and beauty of the earth: A struggle between two world-systems. Oxford University Press. 
Arnstein, S. R. (2015). A ladder of citizen participation. In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The city reader (pp. 279-292). Routledge. (original work published in 1969) https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315748504
Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A. (2003). Handbook of environmental psychology. Wiley. https://books.google.com/books/about/Handbook_of_Environmental_Psychology.html?id=G1F2nlg1pIAC
Caixeta, M. C. B. F., Tzortzopoulos, P. & Fabricio, M. M. (2019). User involvement in building design–a state-of-the-art review. PosFAUUSP, 26(48), 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/ISSN.2317-2762.POSFAU.2019.151752
Cavalieri, I. C. & Almeida, H. N. (2018). Power, empowerment and social participation-the building of a conceptual model. European Journal of Social Science Education and Research, 12(1), 174–185. Power, empowerment and social participation-the building of a conceptual model
Connor, D. M. (1988). A New Ladder of Citizen Participation. National Civic Review, 77(3), 249–257. https://doi.org/10.1002/ncr.4100770309
David, A. (2017). Re-thinking public participation: Lay-expert interaction and knowledge exchange in community-based design processes [Unpublished Ph.D.’s dissertation in Philosophy]. Department of Civil Engineering, the Institute for Urban Planning and Urban Design, University Duisburg-Essen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.
Davidson, S. (1998). Spinning the Wheel of Empowerment. Planning, 1262, 14 &15.
Fiske, J. (2010). Introduction to communication studies (3rd ed.). Routledge. 
Friedmann, J. (2011). Insurgencies: Essays in planning theory. Routledge. https://books.google.com/books?id=FoesAgAAQBAJ&printsec=copyright#v=onepage&q&f=false
Gardner, H. E. (2000). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. Hachette Uk.
Groat, L. N. & Wang, D. (2013). Architectural research methods (2nd ed.). Wiley. https://books.google.com/books/about/Architectural_Research_Methods.html?id=21Uz_E0HNR4C 
Hamdi, N. (1995). Housing without houses: Participation, flexibility, enablement. Intermediate Technology Publications.
Ho, K. L. D., & Lee, Y. C. (2012). The quality of design participation: Intersubjectivity in design practice. International Journal of Design, 6(1), 71–83. https://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/749
Horelli, L. (1997). A methodological approach to children’s participation in urban planning. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, 14(3), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/02815739708730428 .
Horelli, L. (2002). A methodology of participatory planning. In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 607–628). Wiley.
Horelli, L., & Wallin, S. (2010). Developing a new approach to e-planning within community development-The case of Ubiquitous Helsinki. In S. Walllin, L. Horelli & J. Saad-Sulonen (Eds.), Digital tools in participatory planning (pp. 109–133). Centre for Urban and Regional Studies Publications.
Islami, S. Gh. Hanachi, P. & Kamelnia, H. (2009). A Comparative Analysis of “Community Architecture” with “Social Architecture” & “Participatory Architecture”. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture and Urban Planning, 39(1), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2018.68320.
Jenkins, P. & Forsyth, L. (Eds.) (2009). Architecture, participation and society. Routledge. https://books.google.com.et/books?id=BhKPAgAAQBAJ&printsec=copyright#v=onepage&q&f=false
JPT Architects. (2024). Market Street, Newbury, West Berkshire Council, Community Planning Reports, Retrieved May 5th, 2024, from: https://jtp.co.uk/projects/market-street/ .
Kamelnia, H. (2020). Theory of Community Architecture in Contemporary Islamic Architecture Assessing different typologies of CA based on “Architect-User”. Ferdows-e-Honar Journal of Arts, 1(1), 70-86. https://doi.org/10.30508/fhja.2020.44654
Kasymova, J. (2014). Analyzing recent citizen participation trends in Western New York: Comparing citizen engagement promoted by local governments and nonprofit organizations. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 5(2), 47-64. http://.doi.org/10.22230/cjnser.2014v5n2a179
Kotus, J. & Sowada, T. (2017). Behavioural model of collaborative urban management: Extending the concept of Arnstein’s ladder. Cities, 65, 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.02.009
Laing, R. (2018). Digital participation and collaboration in architectural design. Routledge.
Lane, M. B. (2005). Public Participation in Planning: An intellectual history. Australian Geographer, 36(3), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049180500325694 .
Lang, J. & Moleski, W. (2016). Functionalism revisited: Architectural theory and practice and the behavioral sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315254838
Lang, J. (1987). Creating architectural theory: The Role of the Behavioral Sciences in Environmental Design. ‎Van Nostrand Reinhold Publications.
Majidi, M., Mansouri, S. A. & Barati, N. (2021). Landscape Capacities in Realizing the Concept of Participation in Urban Projects. MANZAR, The Scientific Journal of Landscape, 13(54), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.22034/manzar.2020.242196.2077
Mansouri, S. A. & Foroughi, M. (2018). The concept of participation in landscape design. Bagh-e Nazar, 15(62), 17-24. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2018.66282
Munoz Aparici, M. (2016). Together: Participatory methods in Architectural Design: creating public values for urban regeneration [Unpublished master’s thesis in Architecture and the Built Environment]. TU Delft, Netherlands.
Olsson, N. O. E., Hansen, G. K., & Blakstad, S. H. (2022). Who are the users User categorisations and implications on building performance measurement. International Journal of Public Sector Performance Management, 10(4), 566. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPSPM.2022.126408 
Romariz Peixoto, L., Rectem, L. & Pouleur, J. A. (2022). Citizen participation in architecture and urban planning confronted with arnstein’s ladder: Four experiments into popular neighbourhoods of hainaut demonstrate another hierarchy. Architecture, 2(1), 114–134. https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture2010007
Sanoff, H. (1999). Community participation methods in design and planning. Wiley. https://books.google.com/books?id=opndN6irEVsC&printsec=copyright#v=onepage&q&f=false
Sanoff, H. (2006). Multiple views of participatory design. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 23(2), 131-143. http://.doi.org/10.15368/focus.2011v8n1.1
Sanoff, H. (2022). Participatory design. Journal of  Design Planning and Aesthetics Research, 1(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.55755/DepArch.2022.8
Scheer, D. R. (2014). The death of drawing: Architecture in the age of simulation. Routledge. http://.doi.org/10.4324/9781315813950
Schwartz, M. & Schejter, A. M. (2024). Conceptualizing participation: Defining and analyzing public participation in policymaking processes. Telecommunications Policy, 48(7), 102796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102796.
Sikiaridi, E. & Volegaar, F. (2012) Design Lab Think Tank News: City Kit @ Platform 21 Dutch Design Foundation, Retrieved May 1st, 2024 from: https://hybridspacelab.net/city-kit-at-platform-21-dutch-design-foundation/ .
Turner, J. F. & Fichter, R. (1972). Freedom to build: Dweller control of the housing process. Macmillan. 
Waheduzzaman & Mphande, C. H. B. (2014). Gaps in Pursuing Participatory Good Governance: Bangladesh Context. Administration & Society, 46(1), 37 https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399712451891. 
Wang, D. & Oygur, I. (2010). A Heuristic Structure for Collaborative Design. The Design Journal, 13(3), 355-371. https://doi.org/10.2752/146069210X12766130825019 .
Wates, N. & Knevitt, C. (2013). Community Architecture: How People Are Creating Their Own Environment. Routledge. https://books.google.com/books/about/Community_Architecture_Routledge_Revival.html?id=aYi9GdlnFggC
Wates, N. (2014). The community planning handbook: How people can shape their cities, towns and villages in any part of the world. Routledge. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Community_Planning_Handbook.html?id=zxl1dHNNI1MC
Wulz, F. (1986). The Concept of Participation. Design Studies, 7(3), 62-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(86)90052-9

Home

Submit Manuscript

Contact Us