The Right or Wrong to the City? Understanding Citizen Participation in the Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Eras in Malaysia
2. Literature Review
2.1. The Concept of Right
2.2. Who Has the Right to the City, and How to Balance That Right
4.1. Participation Cases of Malaysia in the Pre-COVID-19 Era
4.2. Participation Cases of Malaysia in the Post-COVID-19 Era
5. Discussion: The Right or Wrong to the City?
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
- Lefebvre, H. Writings on Cities; Kofman, E., Lebas, E., Eds.; Blackwell Publishers: Oxford, UK, 1996; . [Google Scholar]
- Biagi, F. Henri Lefebvre’s urban critical theory: Rethinking the city against capitalism. Int. Crit. Thought 2020, 10, 214–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galič, M.; Schuilenburg, M. Reclaiming the smart city: Toward a new right to the city. In Handbook of Smart Cities; Augusto, J.C., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 1419–1436. [Google Scholar]
- Cardullo, P.; Kitchin, R. Smart urbanism and smart citizenship: The neoliberal logic of ‘citizen-focused’ smart cities in Europe. Environ. Plan. C Polit. Space 2019, 37, 813–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Purcell, M. Possible worlds: Henri Lefebvre and the right to the city. J. Urban Aff. 2013, 36, 141–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, R.; Defilippis, J. Community organizing in the United States. Community Dev. J. 2015, 50, 363–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leavitt, J.; Samara, T.; Brady, M. The Right to the City Alliance: Time to democratize urban governance. Progress. Plan. Mag. 2009, 181, 4–12. [Google Scholar]
- Right To The City Alliance: Congress: Hold the Line on Housing. Available online: https://righttothecity.org/congress-hold-the-line-on-housing/ (accessed on 20 October 2021).
- Treuhaft, S.; Huang, M.; Ramiller, A.; Scoggins, J.; Langston, A.; Tan, S. Rent Debt in America: Stabilizing Renters Is Key to Equitable Recovery. Available online: https://nationalequityatlas.org/rent-debt-in-america (accessed on 30 October 2021).
- Adamczyk, A. Here’s What’s in the Democrats’ $1.75 Trillion Build Back Better Plan. Available online: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/28/whats-in-the-democrats-1point85-trillion-dollar-build-back-better-plan.html (accessed on 30 October 2021).
- Levitz, E. The Build Back Better Framework: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly. Available online: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/10/the-build-back-better-framework-the-good-the-bad-the-ugly.html (accessed on 30 October 2021).
- Huchzermeyer, M. Invoking Lefebvre’s “right to the city” in South Africa today: A response to Walsh. City 2014, 18, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pithouse, R. Rethinking public participation from below. Crit. Dialogue 2006, 2, 24–30. [Google Scholar]
- Abahlali baseMjondolo. The High Cost of the Right to the City. Available online: http://abahlali.org/node/6398/ (accessed on 3 November 2021).
- Kuymulu, M.B. The vortex of rights: “Right to the city” at a crossroads. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2013, 37, 923–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malek, J.A.; Lim, S.B.; Tahir, Z. Understanding the issues of citizen participation. J. Nusant. Stud. 2019, 4, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mcknight, J.L.; Kretzmann, J.P. Mapping community capacity. In Community Organizing and Community Building for Health; Minkler, M., Ed.; Rutgers University Press: London, UK, 1999; pp. 157–172. [Google Scholar]
- Attoh, K.A. What kind of right is the right to the city? Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2011, 35, 669–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hohfeld, W.N. Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning; Yale University: New Haven, CT, USA, 1917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Block, P.; McKnight, J. The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods; Berrett-Koehler Publishers: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Waldron, J. Liberal Rights: Collected Papers 1981–1991; Cambridge University Press: London, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Dworkin, R. Taking Rights Seriously; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Phillips, C.; Gilbert, L. Political natures: Re-appropriation of home and water rights in Toronto. In Rights to the City: GU-Home of Geography Publication Series Volume III; Wastl-Walter, D., Staeheli, L., Dowler, L., Eds.; Societa Geografica Italiana: Rome, Italy, 2005; pp. 65–75. [Google Scholar]
- Mitchell, D.; Heynen, N. The geography of survival and the right to the city: Speculations on surveillance, legal innovation, and the criminalization of intervention. Urban Geogr. 2009, 30, 611–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dikec, M. Justice and the ‘right to the city’: The case of French national urban policy. In Rights to the City: GU-Home of Geography Publication Series Volume III; Wastl-Walter, D., Staeheli, L., Dowler, L., Eds.; Societa Geografica Italiana: Rome, Italy, 2005; pp. 45–55. [Google Scholar]
- Harvey, D. The right to the city. New Left Rev. 2008, 53, 23–40. [Google Scholar]
- Malek, J.A.; Lim, S.B.; Palutturi, S. The ethics of smart city planning: Examining post-utilitarianism in Malaysian blueprints. In Proceedings of the International Conference on ICT for Smart Society (ICISS 2021), Bandung, Indonesia, 2–4 August 2021; IEEE Conference Publications: Bandung, Indonesia, 2021; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huntington, S.P. Democracy’s third wave. J. Democr. 1991, 2, 12–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UN-Habitat. World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanization; United Nations Human Settlements Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Walsh, S. ‘We won’t move’: The suburbs take back the center in urban Johannesburg. City 2013, 17, 400–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, S.B.; Malek, J.A.; Yigitcanlar, T. Post-materialist values of smart city societies: International comparison of public values for good enough governance. Future Internet 2021, 13, 201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaika, M. “Don’t call me resilient again!”: The New Urban Agenda as immunology…or…What happens when communities refuse to be vaccinated with ‘smart cities’ and indicators. Environ. Urban. 2017, 29, 89–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Corwin, E.S. The President: Office and Powers 1787–1857, History and Analysis of Practice and Opinion; New York University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foster, D.M. An “invitation to struggle”? The use of force against “legislatively vulnerable” American presidents. Int. Stud. Q. 2006, 50, 421–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, S.B.; Malek, J.A.; Hussain, M.Y.; Tahir, Z. Citizen participation in building citizen-centric smart cities. Geogr. Malays. J. Soc. 2018, 14, 42–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Arnstein, S.R. A ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 1969, 35, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods, 6th ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Mills, A.J.; Durepos, G.; Wiebe, E. Multiple-case designs. In Encyclopedia of Case Study Research; Mills, A.J., Durepos, G., Wiebe, E., Eds.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010; pp. 583–584. [Google Scholar]
- Marrone, M.; Hammerle, M. Smart cities: A review and analysis of stakeholders’ literature. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2018, 60, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Worldometers. COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic. Available online: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ (accessed on 13 April 2021).
- Malek, J.A.; Lim, S.B.; Yigitcanlar, T. Social inclusion indicators for building citizen-centric smart cities: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, S.B.; Malek, J.A.; Hussain, M.Y.; Tahir, Z. The behaviours and job positions of citizens in smart cities’ development. Plan. Malays. 2019, 17, 133–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, S.B. Membina Model Bandar Pintar Berpusatkan Rakyat di Malaysia (Constructing Citizen-Centric Smart City Model in Malaysia). Ph.D. Thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Lim, S.B.; Malek, J.A.; Hussain, M.Y.; Tahir, Z. Participation in e-government services and smart city programs: A case study of Malaysian local authority. Plan. Malays. 2020, 18, 300–312. [Google Scholar]
- World Resources Institute (WRI): Environmental Democracy Index: Malaysia. Available online: https://environmentaldemocracyindex.org/country/mys (accessed on 8 June 2018).
- Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). Democracy Index 2020. In Sickness and in Health? Economist Intelligence Unit: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Nadiah, M. A Comparatives Study on Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in Malaysia and European Union. Master’s Thesis, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Ho, P.; Nor-Hisham, B.M.S.; Zhao, H. Limits of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) in Malaysia: Dam politics, rent-seeking, and conflict. Sustainability 2020, 12, 467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nor-Hisham, B.M.S.; Ho, P. A conditional trinity as “no-go” against non-credible development? Resettlement, customary rights and Malaysia’s Kelau Dam. J. Peasant Stud. 2016, 43, 1177–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, S.B.; Malek, J.A.; Hussain, M.Y.; Tahir, Z.; Saman, N.H.M. SDGs, smart urbanisation, and politics: Stakeholder partnerships and environmental cases in Malaysia. J. Sustain. Sci. Manag. 2021, 16, 190–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mariana, M.O. Stakeholder Participation in the Implementation of Local Agenda 21 in Malaysia. Ph.D. Thesis, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Manaf, H.A.; Mohamed, A.M.; Lawton, A. Assessing public participation initiatives in local government decision-making in Malaysia. Int. J. Public Adm. 2016, 39, 812–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hutchinson, F.E.; Zhang, K. Malaysia’s Declaration of Emergency Keeps PM Muhyiddin’s Window Open. Available online: https://fulcrum.sg/malaysias-declaration-of-emergency-keeps-pm-muhyiddins-window-open/ (accessed on 7 February 2020).
- Palansamy, Y. Despite Public Hearing, Group Claims Selangor Authorities Prevaricating on Degazettement of Bukit Cerakah Forest Reserve. Available online: https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2021/04/08/despite-public-hearing-group-claims%02selangor-authorities-prevaricating-on-d/1964917?fbclid=IwAR3gYFdZXnmcspbKlZEXVFP%02gOLTB0hMVBPO93QpHjNufuUOgK4SbCwUuTg (accessed on 7 April 2020).
- Worker, J.; de Silva, L. Environmental Democracy Index: Technical Note; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Marzuki, A. A review on public participation in Environmental Impact Assessment in Malaysia. Theor. Empir. Res. Urban Manag. 2009, 3, 126–136. [Google Scholar]
- Thanarajasingam, S. Law, Policy and the Implementation of the National Conservation Strategy; Prime Minister Department: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Mohseni, H. Public engagement and smart city definitions: A classifying model for the evaluation of citizen power in 2025 Tehran. GeoJournal 2020, 86, 1261–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vlaanderen. Corona Virus—The Situation in Malaysia. Available online: https://www.flandersinvestmentandtrade.com/export/nieuws/corona-virus-situation-malaysia (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Malaysia. Ordinan Darurat (Kuasa-Kuasa Perlu) 2021 (Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance 2021). Available online: https://assets.theedgemarkets.com/pdf/pua_20210114_PUA12-Emergency%20(Essential%20Powers)%20Ordinance%202021.pdf (accessed on 2 April 2021).
- Chin, J. Commentary: The Real Question behind Anwar Ibrahim’s Legal Challenge over Malaysia Parliament Suspension. Available online: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/anwar-ibrahim-emergency-parliament-suspension-lawsuit-challenge-14052542 (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Yatim, H. Seven NGOs including Bersih 2.0 File Suit on State of Emergency. Available online: https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/seven-ngos-including-bersih-20-file-suit-state-emergency (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Paramasiwam, M. Parliament Sessions Can Be Carried Out during Emergency-King. Available online: https://www.capitalpost.com.my/2021/02/24/parliament-sessions-can-be-carried-out-during-emergency-king/#.YHKHSegzacQ (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Thestar. Takiyuddin: No Parliament Sitting Until Emergency Ends Aug 1. Available online: https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2021/03/03/takiyuddin-no-parliament-sitting-until-emergency-ends-aug-1 (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Palansamy, Y. Failing to Obey Agong on Parliament Reopening Is Lèse-Majesté, Guan Eng Tells Law Minister. Available online: https://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/failing-obey-agong-parliament-reopening-032115628.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANty3I50zIobCTsiVdvX0Z4i47ted6enAbCS7v34X7sR-fd3XWVeq85m7pFM7-Cp7NwQ1-zeI0CXTbgcIUujDYc (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- FTM. No Excuses, Come Clean about Delay in Parliament Sitting, MPs Tell Govt. Available online: https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2021/03/03/no-excuses-come-clean-about-delay-in-parliament-sitting-mps-tell-govt/ (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Hamdan, M.A. Covid-19: Malaysia Bans Public Gatherings of over 250, to Decide on Apec 2020 Summit. Available online: https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/covid19-malaysia-bans-public-gatherings-over-250-decide-apec-2020-summit (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Munyede, P.; Machengete, V.P. Rethinking citizen participation and local governance in the post corona virus pandemic era in Zimbabwe. Transatl. J. Multidiscip. Res. 2020, 2, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Dineen, J.K. SF Housing Debates Go Online as Planning Commission Meets Remotely. Available online: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-housing-debates-go-online-as-Planning-15182948.php# (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Brown-Stevens, A. How Public Participation in Local Government Should Change Forever. Available online: https://www.greenbelt.org/blog/how-public-participation-in-local-government-should-change-forever/ (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Yigitcanlar, T.; Kankanamge, N.; Preston, A.; Gill, P.S.; Rezayee, M.; Ostadnia, M.; Xia, B.; Ioppolo, G. How can social media analytics assist authorities in pandemic-related policy decisions? Insights from Australian states and territories. Health Inf. Sci. Syst. 2020, 8, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tadem, E.C.; Aban, A.P.; Hapal, K.A.F.; Papa, V.B.; Tabiola, H.B.; Sy, J.M.C.; Orlino, M.S.; Dimalanta, R.V.; Candelaria, N.P. A Report on Southeast Asian Community Responses in COVID-19 Time; UP Center for Integrative and Development Studies and Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung: Quezon City, Philippines, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. Policy Brief: The Impact of Covid-19 on South-East Asia; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Hanuschek, E.A.; Woessmann, L. The Economic Impacts of Learning Losses; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Guaralda, M.; Hearn, G.; Foth, M.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Mayere, S.; Law, L. Towards Australian regional turnaround: Insights into sustainably accommodating post-pandemic urban growth in regional towns and cities. Sustainability 2020, 12, 492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yigitcanlar, T.; Butler, L.; Windle, E.; Desouza, K.C.; Mehmood, R.; Corchado, J.M. Can building “artificially intelligent cities” safeguard humanity from natural disasters, pandemics, and other catastrophes? An urban scholar’s perspective. Sensors 2020, 20, 2988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yigitcanlar, T.; Kankanamge, N.; Inkinen, T.; Butler, L.; Preston, A.; Rezayee, M.; Gill, P.; Ostadnia, M.; Ioppolo, G.; Senevirathne, M. Pandemic vulnerability knowledge visualisation for strategic decision-making: A COVID-19 index for government response in Australia. Manag. Decis. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fung, A. Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Adm. Rev. 2006, 66, 66–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jenson, J. Redesigning citizenship regimes after Neoliberalism. Moving towards Social Investment. In What Future for Social Investment? Morel, N., Palier, B., Palme, J., Eds.; Institute for Future Studies: Stockholm, Sweden, 2009; pp. 27–44. [Google Scholar]
- Jenson, J.; Phillips, S.D. Regime shift: New citizenship practices in Canada. Int. J. Can. Stud. 1996, 14, 111–136. [Google Scholar]
- Pancholi, S.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Guaralda, M. Public space design of knowledge and innovation spaces: Learnings from Kelvin Grove Urban Village, Brisbane. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2015, 1, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Esmaeilpoorarabi, N.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Kamruzzaman, M.; Guaralda, M. How does the public engage with innovation districts? Societal impact assessment of Australian innovation districts. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 52, 101813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yigitcanlar, T. Smart city beyond efficiency: Technology-policy-community at play for sustainable urban futures. Hous. Policy Debate 2021, 31, 88–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haustein, E.; Lorson, P.C. Co-creation and co-production in municipal risk governance—A case study of citizen participation in a German city. Public Manag. Rev. 2021, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leading Cities. Co-Creating Cities: Defining Co-Creation as a Means of Citizen Engagement; Northeastern University: Boston, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Leading Cities. Co-Creating Connectivity: Addressing the Citizen Engagement Challenge; Northeastern University: Boston, MA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Yigitcanlar, T.; Kankanamge, N.; Vella, K. How are smart city concepts and technologies perceived and utilized? A systematic geo-Twitter analysis of smart cities in Australia. J. Urban Technol. 2021, 28, 135–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anastasiu, I. Unpacking the smart city through the lens of the right to the city: A taxonomy as a way forward in participatory city-making. In The Hackable City: Digital Media and Collaborative City-Making in the Network Society; de Lange, M., de Waal, M., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 239–260. [Google Scholar]
- Van Der Graaf, S. The right to the city in the platform age: Child-friendly city and smart city premises in contention. Information 2020, 11, 285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Breuer, J.; Walravens, N.; Van der Graaf, S.; Mariën, I. The right to the (smart) city, participation and open data. In Architecture and the Smart City; Figueiredo, S., Krishnamurthy, S., Schröder, T., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2019; pp. 126–138. [Google Scholar]
|Pre-COVID-19 era||Environmental democracy and environmental impact assessments (EIA)||World Resources Institute conducted an Environmental Democracy Index (EDI) rating of 70 countries, and placed Malaysia (with a score of 0.58) near the bottom in 69th place .||Malaysia in an international context|
|In the Democracy Index of 2020 , Malaysia scored 7.19 points out of 10, placing it in the “flawed democracy” segment.||Malaysia in an international context|
|Nadiah  researched the popular involvement in terms of legislation and found that Malaysia has a weak citizen-based involvement in the EIA compared to European Union countries.||Malaysia compared to the European Union context|
|In the Bakun Hydro-electric Project (BHP), ref.  found that the BHP has subjugated indigenous people’s rights of participation in the EIA.||Bakun Hydro-electric Project (BHP) in Sarawak|
|In the Kelau Dam in Pahang, ref.  found that indigenous people’s participation in decision-making was limited and low.||Kelau Dam in Pahang|
|In the Penang South Reclamation project (PSR), ref.  commented that the local fishermen’s civic voices were ignored by power holders, despite the many protests and discussions with politicians.||Penang South Reclamation project|
|Decision-making process in local government vis-à-vis urban governance policy and political participation||Mariana  found a low level of participation among local authorities in the Local Agenda 21 in Malaysia. In Petaling Jaya’s case, the community’s level of participation was also low, ranging from the non-participation to the tokenism levels.||National level and the local level of Petaling Jaya City|
|Lim  found Petaling Jaya’s level of citizen participation has progressed to medium, indicating there were signs and cases of partnerships and consultations. In contrast, the scenario of citizen participation in Cyberjaya was very much lower than in Petaling Jaya.||Petaling Jaya and Cyberjaya City|
|Manaf, Mohamed and Lawton  examined public involvement in influencing the decision-making process in the Kedah, Perlis and Penang local governments. They concluded that the people intended to get involved in the public process, and not just as consumers.||Two in urban areas and four in rural areas local governments|
|Post-COVID-19 era||Democracy under emergency, movement control orders, and social distancing||Under the declarations of emergency (12th January to 1st August 2021), parliament, state assemblies and elections were not allowed to convene unless a decision was made by the King . Further, under various movement control orders, most civic participation activities in cities were restricted.||National level|
|A case of physical public hearing carried out in the Shah Alam City Council. However, the authority was caught prevaricating on degazettement of the Bukit Cerakah forest reserve .||Shah Alam City Council|
|Phases||Types of Movement Control Order|
|Phase 1—from 18 March 2020 to 3 May 2020||Movement Control Order 1.0 (MCO 1.0)|
|Phase 2—from 4 May 2020 to 9 June 2020||Conditional Movement Control Order (CMCO)|
|Phase 3—from 10 June 2020 to 31 December 2020||Recovery Movement Control Order (RMCO)|
|Phase 4—from 14 December 2020 to 31 December 2020||CMCO in the areas with high COVID-19 cases|
|Phase 5—from 1 January 2020 to 31 March 2021||RMCO nationwide|
|Phase 6—from 13 January 2020 to 4 March 2020||Movement Control Order 2.0 (MCO 2.0), and Declaration of Emergency (12 January 2021 to 1 August 2021)|
|Current Measure until 14 April 2021||CMCO in Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Johor, Penang and Kelantan; and Recovery RMCO in other eight states.|
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lim, S.B.; Mazhar, M.U.; Malek, J.A.; Yigitcanlar, T. The Right or Wrong to the City? Understanding Citizen Participation in the Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Eras in Malaysia. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 238. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7040238
Lim SB, Mazhar MU, Malek JA, Yigitcanlar T. The Right or Wrong to the City? Understanding Citizen Participation in the Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Eras in Malaysia. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2021; 7(4):238. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7040238Chicago/Turabian Style
Lim, Seng Boon, Muhammad Usman Mazhar, Jalaluddin Abdul Malek, and Tan Yigitcanlar. 2021. "The Right or Wrong to the City? Understanding Citizen Participation in the Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Eras in Malaysia" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 4: 238. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7040238