New Study: Limited Impact of Participatory Planning in Sweden

"Invited participation," where citizens are invited to take part in planning processes, is often viewed as a method to promote equality and empower marginalized groups. The article presents and elaborates on four pathways for how this might occur, but in the Swedish context, participation by marginalized groups is primarily understood as a tool for gathering information and implementing decisions that have already been made.

The national survey, sent to over 500 Swedish politicians and planners, reveals that participation processes are often vague and ambiguous in ways that hinder the realization of any meaningful link between participation and increased justice. One of the study’s main conclusions is that participatory planning in its current form does not succeed in challenging the structural inequalities present in society.

"Even though we have a broad and generous theory on how participation in planning could contribute to more equitable urban development—and despite Sweden being a country with particularly favorable conditions, according to previous research—our study points to significant challenges," says Nils Hertting, one of the researchers behind the study.

Based on the findings, the researchers critically assess some common theories about the prerequisites for successful participatory planning. First, decentralization—where local authorities have substantial autonomy—may reduce rather than increase, as previous research has suggested, the incentives for decision-makers to genuinely share power with citizens. Second, trust in the political system plays a crucial role. When such trust is high, it may actually decrease, rather than increase, the willingness to share power with citizens. Finally, the collaborative culture also matters. Contrary to a dominant assumption in the research literature, the study suggests that established interest groups may be incentivized to resist new participatory initiatives in order to protect their own positions.

"Participatory planning in Sweden is therefore much more difficult—and perhaps a more radical idea—than many believe. Interestingly, such reforms seem to work better in societies with weaker democratic institutions and lower trust in politicians and government authorities. This presents a systemic dilemma: a reasonably well-functioning democracy may itself hinder more radical measures to increase participatory justice. At the very least, it should be clear that merely inviting citizens for symbolic reasons is risky. Participatory planning initiatives require thoughtful design and, above all, clear and robust structures that are anchored in and legitimate to both civil servants and decision-makers," says Nils Hertting.