4. In which ways is the initiative creative and innovative?
|
Before the Citizen Group was organized, urban planning was initiated mainly by experts and administrators. In such a situation, to systemize civic participation in urban planning required the following; ① strategies and plans for civic participation, ② administrative support system, ③ technical materials and ④ meditation of differences in opinions. Therefore the city focused on how it could harmonize these four subjects.
Cooperative Strategy Planning
For responsible participation by different stakeholders, cooperative strategies were established from phase zero. A group of a dozen administrators, NGOs and experts was formed on December 9, 2011, and took part in more than 60 conferences to map out specific plans for recruitment for the Citizen Group, agenda and support for participants. Beginning with just 10 debaters, this panel eventually got 42 members as more organizations applied to the panel.
Employment of Experts
The Citizen Group for Urban Planning will inevitably experience trial and error because of lack of precedent in Korea. To minimize this, the city introduced the master planner (MP) system. By appointing three experts who had studied civic participation, the city put them in challenging roles as MPs to map out general plans for running the Citizen Group and meditate differences of opinions among group members.
City Council Participates
One of the most important elements in civic participation is representation. A number of residents joined the Citizen Group, but they are not said to have had representation. So to grant them representation and gathering the Suwon City Council’s opinions in the process of urban planning, the city invited council members to the Citizen Group. Six sections of the Citizen Group each have a council member.
Opinions from Suwon-based Businesses Collected
In a narrow sense, Suwon residents refer to people who reside in Suwon, while the broader meaning could be all people who live and work in Suwon. The most important thing is considering workers at business based in the city. So Suwon has tried to reflect visions for a future city by providing businesses with two opportunities to suggest opinions, though no Suwon-based enterprise was included in the Citizen Group.
Cooperation with Suwon Office of Education
Urban planning will design 20-year plans for the future Suwon. Nevertheless, no adolescents had a chance to participate in civil administration. Hence, the city invited 100 youngsters to the Youth Group for Urban Planning in cooperation with the Suwon Office of Education. They sought solutions to problems around school areas and suggested their own ideas on city issues.
|
|
5. Who implemented the initiative and what is the size of the population affected by this initiative?
|
Public Administrators and Policy Think Tanks: Suwon Planning Division and Suwon Development Institute (Suwon Research Institute)
Public administrators and policy think tanks including Suwon Development Institute (now Suwon Research Institute) took the lead in overall control and planning of the Citizen Group for Urban Planning in collaboration with social groups, city planners, professors and researchers.
Local NGOs: Suwon Agenda 21
NGOs shared knowledge obtained from experience in civic education and participation and encouraged residents to join the Citizen Group.
Experts: City Planners (Engineers)
Experts offered academic and technical materials to assist the process of discussing urban planning.
Academic Circle: Korea Planners Association & University Research Labs
A master planner of Suwon 2030 Urban Planning and president of the Korea Planners Association joined the project to play a key role in urban planning and conflict control.
Also helping were university researchers and students majoring in urban engineering, who held debates with residents and kept records of discussions.
Residents: 130 People and 100 Adolescents from All Walks of Life
The Citizen Group for Urban Planning consists of experts, residents, company staff, sole proprietors, the socially disadvantaged and university students selected in consideration of sex, age and region. Many applicants applied to join the group over the course of a month and civic social groups recommended some of them. Finally, 130 members were chosen by drawing. The city also included 100 teenagers in the Youth Group for Urban Planning.
|
6. How was the strategy implemented and what resources were mobilized?
|
Financial Resources
Compared to urban planning initiated merely by a few experts and administrators, the Citizen Group for Urban Planning project required a budget of 40 million won (approximately 40,000 USD) to devise urban master plans. Operating costs spent on the group from December 9, 2011, through June 30, 2012, include part of labor and planning costs. The 130 residents and 100 adolescents are volunteers working for no pay. Enthusiasm and voluntary participation of civic groups, academics and experts are intangible financial resources.
Technical Resources
The Citizen Group for Urban Planning is participated by 130 residents and 100 young people. Technical support is required to gather a great number of opinions as fast as possible, draw up agenda and take votes. First, a system integrating online contents of discussion was made to collect opinions from each section. The intent was to send opinions in real time from each section to the control center. The Mind Map program was applied to classify opinions by type. Finally the electronic voting system was introduced to confirm the Citizen Group’s decisions by vote. Giving the people a voice in municipal administration contributed to planting strong trust of the city government in residents.
Human Resources
Many entities including public administrators, NGOs, policy think tanks (Suwon Development Institute), academia and experts gave a helping hand to the Citizen Group of Urban Planning. They provided useful ideas and supported the group through providing personnel from the planning to operating stages of the group.
Suwon Development Institute took the lead in overall planning and operation, and public administrators lent material support in operations. NGOs encouraged residents to join the group and suggested wonderful ideas to gather opinions from residents. Academics and experts backed up the group in a technical manner by proposing plans for its operations and gathering opinions.
Forty-two members composed of administrators, experts and NGOs played a pivotal role in the group. Another 20-plus helpers assisted the project to make it run smoothly. Furthermore, 130 residents and 100 young people contributed by growing as civic leaders after the project was completed.
|
|
7. Who were the stakeholders involved in the design of the initiative and in its implementation?
|
Resident-initiated Urban Planning
The purpose of this project is to map out urban planning initiated and decided by residents. Urban planning is an official course of action under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act. The comprehensive plan is on directing urban long-term development and fundamental spatial structure, which used to be considered the exclusive turf of administrators and experts. In general, they initiated urban planning and residents suggested opinions in a form of passive civic participation.
But the Suwon Citizen Group of Urban Planning Project was basically framed by 130 residents and 100 adolescents, and administrators and specialists technically complemented the framework to prepare a draft and briefed residents on it again before gathering their opinions. As such, urban planning was completed.
It was difficult to expect the emergence of aggressive systems that allowed residents to join the planning process in the past. Suwon overcame the experiential limitations of Korean-style urban planning that residents participated in and implemented experimental policies to lay the groundwork for urban planning initiated by residents.
Making Up for Limits of Representative Democracy
The Citizen Group for Urban Planning was made up of 130 residents and 100 adolescents chosen from all walks of life, including experts, residents, businesspeople, business owners, the socially disadvantaged and students through recommendations from civic groups and volunteers. Reflected in urban planning were 278 opinions or 17 percent of the 1,627 submitted in a personal manner other than official agenda. Also, 1,229 opinions (75.5 percent) were examined by officers before being reflected in policies or projects.
The group recently saw its membership swell to 300 to discuss “traffic issues and conflict with traditional markets in the opening of a large shopping mall” and “construction of Suwon Convention Center”.
Suwon made an effort to compensate for the limits of representative democracy by attracting residents to take part in urban planning through the group. The group shared residents’ opinions by taking advantage of information technology, and directly decided policies through electronic voting. As a result, future visions, three administrative goals, 12 strategies and 36 detailed practical strategies of the city were all set by residents themselves.
|
|
8. What were the most successful outputs and why was the initiative effective?
|
Steering Sessions: Monitoring
Directors mainly comprised of civic group leaders preside over meetings. To compensate for problems caused in the process of holding official conferences of the Citizen Group, directors and officials had separate meetings between conferences. Such talks saw the reporting of the results of monitoring discussions by section in the group. Moreover, after the group’s operations were finished, directors gathered to evaluate the group in a discussion.
Satisfaction Evaluation for Citizen Group
A survey was conducted on resident satisfaction for the Citizen Group. Ninety-six percent said the group was necessary and 90 percent answered that they wanted to keep participating in the group.
Respondents were relatively positive over the number of debaters and contents of discussion. They were very satisfied with the comfortable and interesting atmosphere of debates and decision-making through e-voting machines, while expressing dissatisfaction with the limited time of discussion (about 60 minutes) and low frequency (five times).
|
|
9. What were the main obstacles encountered and how were they overcome?
|
1) Administrative Repulsion
Only public hearings and briefing sessions are institutionally guarantees of civic participation in urban planning. Accordingly, the aggressive civic participation system is certain to be recognized as administrative burden to be expressed in the form of repulsion. Suwon kept educating public officials to relieve this problem, and after the first meeting of the Citizen Group, such repulsion shifted to confidence in civic participation.
2) Lack of Expertise in Citizen Group
Urban planning to map out 20-year plans requires specialized knowledge including population study. The residents who joined the Citizen Group, however, lacked expertise. To resolve this issue, the city provided academic and technical materials angled toward the level of residents, ran an orientation and assigned specialists and experts. Participating residents were offered the necessary materials interpreted in easy-to-understand terms at least a week prior to an official conference, which proceeded in the order of orientation-discussion-vote. Explanation for a day’s topic was given in advance before discussion. In addition, a city planner and two public officials from each section were deployed to help residents understand the discussion.
3) Stiff & Unfriendly Atmosphere
Urban planning can be a dry and difficult topic, and this could impede smooth discussion. Also meetings held on Saturdays were considered an obstacle to active participation. To remove such negative factors, the city tried to create a pleasant atmosphere like a public festival in which every resident is willing to participate. Each discussion included cultural performances. The Photogenic Prize was awarded to those who displayed funny scenes during discussion. Photos of participating residents were exhibited at the venue to attract resident interest. Directors and officials including public administrators kindly induced group members to join debates freely. In such a comfortable and interesting atmosphere, residents could suggest ideas and discuss them as much as they liked.
|