000			02795nab a2200289 4500
003			OSt
005			20220801204900.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			220719b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_a Slaev , Aleksandar D _949166
245			_aOvercoming the failures of citizen participation: The relevance of the liberal approach in planning/
260			_bSage, _c2019.
300			_aVol 18, Issue 4, 2019 : (448-469 p.).
520			_aThis article examines the obstacles to public participation in a representative democracy and the approaches that can help to overcome these obstacles. Democracy is never perfect because of the inherent difficulties of developing democratic institutions, yet the drawbacks of representative democracy are considerably greater than those of direct democracy. We consider public participation as an element of direct democracy integrated into the structure of representative democracy in order to balance the power of the centre with that of the constituent members of the democratic system. We underscore the role of nomocracy, by which we mean promoting the power of equitable legal and other social rules over the power of the centre. In public participation, the functioning of rules faces greater obstacles than in other forms of democracy. Thus, the professionalism of planners and public administrators is particularly important in formulating these rules; it is even more important when the challenges of establishing rules are major or insuperable. We distinguish between two types of planning professionalism: teleocratic (based primarily on technocratic skills) and nomocratic (based on the nomocratic liberal approach). We recognize the significance of the former, but our main contribution to the debate on public participation is to emphasize the crucial importance and priority of nomocratic professionalism in overcoming the difficulties of citizen involvement and the shortcomings of representative democracy. To test our conclusions, we explore the practice of citizen engagement in the process of planning bikeway networks in several large Bulgarian cities, where public participation is frustrated by the prevalence of the teleocratic approach and the lack of nomocratic traditions.
650			_anomocracy, _949167
650			_aplanning professionalism, _949168
650			_a public participation, _949169
650			_arepresentative democracy, _949170
650			_arule of law _949171
700			_a Kovachev, Atanas _949172
700			_aNozharova, Boriana _949173
700			_aDaskalova, Diliana _949174
700			_aNikolov, Peter _949175
773	0		_08831 _916470 _dLondon Sage Publications Ltd. 2002 _tPlanning theory _x1473-0952
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/1473095219848472
942			_2ddc _cART
999			_c12413 _d12413