Summary of the involvement strategy analysis

Abstract

This report provides an analysis of the strategies for stakeholder engagement in a Superblock planning process. The recommended engagement strategies for stakeholders are listed in Deliverable 4.2. In this Deliverable, we focus on a detailed stakeholder analysis and explain what their needs are and how they need to be addressed. A focus is hereby on the different strategies needed to address different citizen concerns and suggestions. Therefore, we introduce a typology of citizens to clarify the development of appropriate participation strategies. In addition to this stakeholder group, we discuss how to engage administrative and political decision makers, businesses, media, public service providers, researchers, and other interest groups. To categorize the stakeholder group of citizens, we use a typology which characterizes people by their way of picking information on their mobility. This pro:motion typology distinguishes six groups of citizens: 1) Spontaneous – On the Go, 2) Highly Informed Sustainability, 3) Efficiency-oriented Information Pickers, 4) Interested Conservatives, 5) Low Demand, and 6) Digital Illiterates. The willingness to adapt the own mobility behavior and to consider alternatives to the private car in everyday mobility is assumed to be strongly correlated with the openness to an urban transformation process towards traffic-calmed planning concepts, such as that of the Superblock. The group of Digital Illiterates, Low Demand, and Interested Conservatives group are predominant in the rural areas but are nonetheless important to deal with since they might be strong opponents to the Superblock concept due to their high affinity to private cars and limited openness for changes in their mobility behavior. They would need to be addressed either in person or with analog information material. The Spontaneous – On the Go and Efficiency-Oriented Information Pickers types, which are dominant in urban areas, can be reached well via digital media. Both types respond more to rational, economic arguments, while the Highly Informed Sustainability type is more interested in ecological motives and backgrounds. A detailed description and examples of involvement methods which are suitable for each pro:motion type will be given in Deliverable 4.2. The most important actors besides citizens are administrative and political decision-makers. Administrations can promote or delay the realization of Superblocks and are thus decisive for the seamless implementation of a transformation process. Citizens usually cannot influence administrations directly, but only through political leaders. Therefore, political decision makers are one of the most important groups that can enable the realization of Superblocks. Other relevant stakeholders in the deployment of Superblocks are business owners which can be distinguish in associations and local business owners. Strategies addressing their concerns need therefore be either on a conceptual level or require a targeted solution for their business. Another identified stakeholder is media. They can act on their own initiative and report objectively about the Superblock issue but also comment in a positive or negative way. In doing so, they can make the public discussion present, but their soft power can complicate or facilitate the process depending on their point of view. Public service providers are optional stakeholders that can be included in a Superblock transformation process. Their main interest is the smooth running of public utilities, such as waste disposal or ensuring access for the fire department which is why the integration of potential concerns from their side is crucial. Researchers and experts can be optionally involved in the process. Their approach and methods provide a neutral view of an implementation concept, which can be helpful in the debate over the implementation of a Superblock. Other interest groups form communities of interest that operate either at the national level (e.g., auto or bicycle advocacy groups) or at the very local level (e.g., NIMBYism). Since their opinions in favor or against a project are often very extreme, participation is often somewhat cumbersome but still worthwhile as experiences have shown. In the third section of this Deliverable, we discuss the level of participation of engagement strategies which is crucial in determining effective methods for the process. There are different concepts for levels of participation from which one is the renown but meanwhile outdated Arnstein’s ladder of participation. Other concepts based on this distinguish between informing, consulting, involving, collaborating, and empowering or information, consultation, participation and social learning. Those concepts are helpful to describe different intensities of engagement strategies. In a final remark, we summarize current options for using online, hybrid or virtual engagement strategies. Especially the Corona pandemic has led to the acceleration of various opportunities to design digital engagement processes.