Helena Leino

Do matters of concern matter? Bringing issues back to participation

The objective of our article is twofold. First, we claim that the theoretical planning discussion dealing with public participation has forgotten one basic principle, namely that the people are taking part in the planning process because they are interested in a particular issue. There is a need for new conceptual approaches in participatory research which carry the discussion first towards the issues, then to the structures of participation. For this reason, we have combined practice-oriented policy analysis with the recent discussion of issue politics. Second, we implement the key propositions of the theoretical debate in an empirical case. The aim is to indicate how the trajectory of the issue, as well as its continuities and discontinuities, develop in diverse ways in different civic forums. We claim that this perspective provides more information for researchers, civil servants and citizens about the logic of participatory practice.

Boundary Interaction in Emerging Scenes: Two Participatory Planning Cases from Finland

This article examines the self-organising features of participatory planning. The argument is that the complexity and non-linearity of present-day participatory practices unavoidably transgresses the formal linear idea of public interaction in planning processes. To study this development, the article approaches public participation as boundary interaction (Wenger, 2003). The approach is applied to two cases of participatory planning in Finland. Further, the article analyses the possibilities self-organising initiatives offer for developing cooperative practices in urban planning.

Situated knowledge–situated legitimacy: Consequences of citizen participation in local environmental governance

Abstract This article examines how situated knowledge produced by citizens affects the construction and understanding of legitimacy in local environmental governance. By scrutinising a case from Finland where local citizens decided to take lake restoration in their own hands, we demonstrate how legitimacy is constructed in a specific local context. The main concepts used to interpret this dynamic are situated knowledge (Haraway, 1988; Lang, 2011) and situated legitimacy (Connelly, Richardson, & Miles, 2006). The paper shows how the local traditions together with the historical and social context have distinct effects on the construction of situated knowledge. Further, situated knowledge not only frames the boundaries and possibilities of local action, but also shapes the interpretations of legitimacy. Approaching the construction of knowledge and legitimacy from this perspective challenges the customary understanding of context in participatory practices and, as we suggest, has also the ability to improve these processes.

It’s all about the birds! Non-human actors’ situational power in creating conditions for human engagement

In this article, we aim to understand how planning theory and practice should approach new urban entities and their transforming meanings. We argue that planning practice has difficulties in identifying and recognising developmental processes where the human attachment to the local environment gradually changes the identity and use of an area. Instead, these processes are interpreted as disruptions in the planned course of action. We illustrate our viewpoint with an empirical example from Finland. The case is about a significant spot of biodiversity in a completely man-made environment. The study serves as an example of how artefacts actively co-shape the events and environment around them and thus create a relationship between humans and their surroundings. Drawing on a science and technology studies-inspired perspective on the relationships between human and non-human actors, we stress the importance of artefacts, local setting and processual development in urban planning.

Bypassing Publicity for Getting Things Done: Between Informal and Formal Planning Practices in Finland

ABSTRACT This article contributes to the discussion concerning the ways in which network governance and classical-modernist government practices juxtapose and redefine the idea of publicity in planning practices. Through Finnish urban planning cases we ask what kind of publicity is being promoted. We argue that new modes of governing build and employ institutional ambiguity for ‘getting things done’. This provides possibilities to ‘skim the cream’ of the best possible ways of resolving present planning issues. The crucial question is whether the possible positive outcomes give a mandate to the process, even if the process operates in a democratic void.

The Locality of Boundary Practices

The increasing amount of multiple actors and interests has increased the unpredictability, volatility and uncertainty of participatory planning processes. This chapter discusses the potentiality and usability of the concepts of boundary interaction boundary organisation and trading zones in the context of planning. In addition, two participatory planning cases from Finland, Tampere, are examined from the perspective of emerging situational boundary practices. Looking at the interaction of multiple actors from this angle emphasises the role of local knowledge and the social relationships that affect land-use management and planning. The chapter offers some support for the notion that these concepts have the potential to facilitate linkages between different actor groups and divergent social worlds. The temporal and situational arrangements are highlighted, as it is in the particular context in which issues are opened up to the public and possibilities to boundary interaction outside traditional municipal institutional settings either appear or don’t.

Researchers as knowledge brokers: translating knowledge or co-producing legitimacy? An urban infill case from Finland

ABSTRACT Knowledge brokering is on the rise in various spheres of knowledge societies. The aim has been to improve the interaction between knowledge production and use. This paper analyses knowledge-brokering activities in the context of urban densification. In an institutionally ambiguous situation we organized a new kind of participatory event for enabling the public discussion on densification to grow. We interpret the event as a boundary interaction, wherein we acted as knowledge brokers. However, the question remains as to what were we actually co-producing: brokered knowledge, novel collaborative partnerships or political legitimacy for a vague planning process?