In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PUBLIC PARTICIPATIO N I N PLANNING I N GENERA L Public participatio n i s a concep t i n tow n plannin g tha t emerge d i n th e lat e 1960s i n som e Wester n countries . However , i t wa s no t unti l th e lat e 1970 s that publi c participatio n becam e a n establishe d lega l righ t i n som e jurisdictions. A n instanc e i s th e New South Wales Planning and Assessment Act o f 1979, which provide s statutor y right s fo r th e public to participate i n (a ) the plannin g stud y conducte d befor e th e pla n i s made; (b) the actua l plannin g process; and (c) the plan implementation stag e (as in the case where a develope r makes a planning proposal accordin g to the plan) . Public participatio n i s inevitabl y a matte r o f politic s an d government . Those who favour wide r publi c participation woul d argu e tha t (a ) as a means , it woul d facilitat e implementatio n (b y dilutin g loca l reaction') , educat e th e public an d enhanc e socia l cohesion ; an d (b ) i t i s a politica l en d i n itself . Politicians woul d welcom e a wide r scop e o f publi c participatio n a s the y ca n then acces s t o mor e informatio n tha t enable s the m t o bette r 'control ' th e government an d us e thi s a s a power base for thei r mandate . Student s usuall y would sa y ye s t o publi c participatio n a s the y thin k tha t i t i s a hallmar k o f democracy an d responsibl e government . Thos e wh o argu e agains t publi c participation would say that public participation delay s the process of planning and tha t th e publi c hav e limite d facult y t o participat e intelligibly . Th e developer's attitud e i s ambivalent . Whil e h e o r sh e woul d naturall y objec t t o citizen participatio n tha t ma y frustrate , dela y o r compromis e th e projects , h e or sh e woul d welcom e bette r acces s t o governmen t informatio n an d greate r representation i n the plannin g process by his o r her lobbyists . The majo r proble m confrontin g th e tow n planne r i n Hon g Kong is largel y a matte r o f publi c administratio n a s mos t tow n planner s ar e civi l servants . 6 90฀ Context฀and฀Procedure s฀ We nee d t o understan d th e evolutio n o f loca l politic s befor e w e ca n meaningfully appreciat e th e natur e o f publi c participatio n i n plannin g i n Hong Kong . In th e ol d day s o f colonial administration , whe n th e constitutio n o f Hon g Kong wa s sai d t o b e on e o f 'governmen t b y discussion ' (Endacott , 1964) , public participatio n wa s limite d t o thos e wit h who m th e governmen t woul d like t o discuss . Suc h 'discussion ' wit h respectfu l member s o f societ y ha d no t prevented th e passin g o f raciall y discriminator y zonin g laws , whic h hav e never bee n mentione d i n th e literatur e o n tow n plannin g o r la w i n Hon g Kong fo r 'obviou s reasons ' tha t th e reade r ca n understand . Failin g that , th e reader i s referred t o Robert Home' s Of Planting and Planning: The Making of British Colonial Cities (1997) . Thes e laws , whic h wer e repeale d i n 1946 , included Hill District Reservation Ordinance, Peak District (Residence) Ordinance, an d Cheung Chau (Residence) Ordinance. Besides , the leftis t riot s in th e lat e...

Share