Next Article in Journal
Postgraduate Education of Board Members and R&D Investment—Evidence from China
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatial Distribution Patterns and Ethnobotanical Knowledge of Farmland Demarcation Tree Species: A Case Study in the Niyodo River Area, Japan
Previous Article in Journal
The Relationships among Perceived Value, Intention to Use Hashtags, eWOM, and Brand Loyalty of Air Travelers
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Spatial Analysis and Sustainability of Rural Cultural Landscapes: Linpan Settlements in China’s Chengdu Plain
Open AccessArticle

What Difference Does Public Participation Make? An Alternative Futures Assessment Based on the Development Preferences for Cultural Landscape Corridor Planning in the Silk Roads Area, China

1
Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, 1958 Frederiksberg, Denmark
2
Faculty of Organic Agricultural Sciences, University of Kassel, 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany
3
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(22), 6525; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226525
Received: 12 October 2019 / Revised: 6 November 2019 / Accepted: 12 November 2019 / Published: 19 November 2019
Landscape corridor planning (LCP) has become a widespread practice for promoting sustainable regional development. This highly complex planning process covers many policy and planning issues concerning the local landscape, and ideally involves the people who live in the area to be developed. In China, regional planners and administrators encourage the development of landscape corridor planning. However, the current LCP process rarely considers ideas from local residents, and public participation is not recognized as beneficial to planning outcomes. We use a specific Chinese case of LCP to analyze how citizen involvement may enrich sustainable spatial planning in respect to ideas considered and solutions developed. To this end, we compare a recently approved landscape corridor plan that was created without public participation with alternative solutions for the same landscape corridor, developed with the involvement of local residents. These alternatives were then evaluated by professional planners who had been involved in the initial planning process. We demonstrate concrete differences between planning solutions developed with and without public participation. Further, we show that collaborative processes can minimize spatial conflicts. Finally, we demonstrate that public participation does indeed contribute to innovations that could enrich the corridor plan that had been produced exclusively by the decision-makers. The paper closes with a discussion of difficulties that might accompany the involvement of local residents during sustainable LCP in China. View Full-Text
Keywords: cultural landscape corridor planning; participation; conflicts; development preferences; alternative future assessments; scenario planning cultural landscape corridor planning; participation; conflicts; development preferences; alternative future assessments; scenario planning
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Xu, H.; Plieninger, T.; Zhao, G.; Primdahl, J. What Difference Does Public Participation Make? An Alternative Futures Assessment Based on the Development Preferences for Cultural Landscape Corridor Planning in the Silk Roads Area, China. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6525.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop