000			01728nab a2200205 4500
003			OSt
005			20230718185136.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			230718b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aZhang, Lin _953947
245			_aRoles and Motivations of Planning Professionals Who Promote Public Participation in Urban Planning Practice: _bTwo Case Studies from Beijing, China/
260			_bSage, _c2020.
300			_a Vol 56, Issue 4, 2020:( 1237-1262 p.).
520			_aPublic participation in urban planning is a contested issue in China. In this article, we look at the endogenous mechanism of institutional change, by analyzing the roles and motivations of “third-party” planning professionals in two contrasting cases: a government-led and a citizen-led participatory practice. Findings show that planners were advocates of citizen participation in heritage preservation in both cases and acted as “mediators” in the first and “activists” in the second, yet remained within the mainstream planning structure. Their motivation to serve the rights of the citizens was clear, but subordinate to the drive to conform to the professional norms of authenticity in preservation in both cases. In contrast to both the Global North where more agonistic approaches question inclusive planning and the Global South where insurgent planning finds space to maneuver, Chinese urban planning seems to proceed by taking small steps within narrow margins when it comes to citizen engagement.
700			_aHooimeijer, Pieter _953949
700			_aGeertman, Stan _953950
773	0		_09296 _916911 _dSage Publications _tUrban Affairs Review
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/1078087419895116
942			_2ddc _cEJR
999			_c13840 _d13840