Summary

The discourse and practice of participatory governance experienced a boom in European cities in the aftermath of the new millennium, coinciding with a period of economic boom. This project thoroughly examines the role of participatory urban governance in times of crisis and austerity: Has participation strengthened? Has it weakened? Does it remain unchanged? Has it been reformulated?

In principle, the empirical evidence points to four contradictory directions: (1) the continuity of some pre-existing formal structures of participation; (2) residualisation and the disappearance of some others; (3) the emergence of new practices; and (4) the development of new meanings and new roles for participation. But do all these trends have the same weight or are there some that clearly dominate over the other? Are there significant variations from place to place? What are the explanatory factors for such variations? When we speak of participatory governance we are concerned not only with what happens to citizen participation mechanisms promoted from the “top” by the public institutions, but also we wonder what new participation dynamics emerge from the “bottom”

Overall, how are relationships between government and citizens evolving? Can we talk about new models, new paradigms? What political assessment should be made of them? This project addresses these issues through a comparative analysis of various British cities (Cardiff, Leicester) and of the Spanish state (Madrid, Barcelona, Lleida and San Sebastián).

 

PUBLICATIONS

Blanco, I. (2014). “Between democratic network governance and neoliberalism: a regime-theoretical analysis of collaboration in Barcelona”, Cities, 44, 123-130 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.10.007

Canal, Ramon (2017). “¿Queremos decir lo mismo cuando hablamos de participación? Perspectivas de activistas, técnicos y políticos locales reveladas con metodología Q”. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 158: 23-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.158.23

Davies, J S. and Blanco I. (2017).  “Austerity Urbanism: Patterns of Neoliberalisation and Resistance in Six Cities of Spain and the UK”. Environment and Planning A. (open access)  http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0308518X17701729

De la Fuente, R (2015). “Crisis, austeridad y experiencias urbanas: una aproximación a los casos de Madrid y Barcelona”, Quid 16., Revista de Área de Estudios Urbanos, 5: 121-136.  http://publicaciones.sociales.uba.ar/index.php/quid16/article/view/1348

Parés, M; Boada, J.; Canal, R.; Hernando, E. y Martínez, R. (2017). “Challenging collaborative urban governance under austerity: how local governments and social organizations deal with housing policy in Catalonia (Spain)”. Journal of Urban Affairs.  http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07352166.2017.1310531

Pill, M. and Guarneros-Meza, V. (2017). “Local governance under austerity: hybrid organisations and hybrid officers”. Policy & Politics. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557317X14895966143481 (open access)

Tellería, I.; Ahedo, I. (2016). “Movimientos urbanos y democratización en la ciudad: una propuesta de análisis”. Revista española de ciencia política, ISSN 1575-6548, Nº 40, 2016, págs. 91-115.

 

TRANSGOB Report Series. English Version

TRANSGOB Report Series, July 2016 Number 1 Cardiff

TRANSGOB Report Series, July 2016 Number 2, Leicester

TRANSGOB Report Series, July 2016 Number 3, Barcelona

TRANSGOB Report Series, July 2016 Number 4, Donostia – San Sebastián

TRANSGOB Report Series, July 2016 Number 5, Madrid

TRANSGOB Report Series, July 2016 Number 6 Lleida

TRANSGOB Report Series. Spanish Version

TRANSGOB Report Series, Julio 2016 Número 3, Barcelona

TRANSGOB Report Series, Julio 2016 Número 4, Donostia San Sebastián

TRANSGOB Report Series, Julio 2016 Número 5, Madrid

TRANSGOB Report Series, Julio 2016 Número 6, Lleida

 

 

 

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License