JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Critical Review about the Character of Communication among Participating Stakeholders in the Improving Alley Landscapes in Residential Neighborhoods Project
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Critical Review about the Character of Communication among Participating Stakeholders in the Improving Alley Landscapes in Residential Neighborhoods Project
Kim, Yun-Geum; Lee, Ai-Ran;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
This paper discusses the character of communication among participating stakeholders in the Improving Alley Landscapes in Residential Neighborhoods project. The participation of diverse stakeholders in conventional urban redevelopment is considered to delay and complicate the progress of a project. However, in urban regeneration, a field-oriented operating system and collaboration between diverse stakeholders is considered critical to building a sustainable community. A stakeholder is defined as "a person or organization that can influence decision-making or be influenced by it." This paper uses a case study to examine what types of stakeholders participate and what communicative processes and ideas are shared among them. Six neighborhoods were selected out of a total of 26 of Seoul`s 2014 Improving Alley Landscapes project. This research was developed through interviews and a review of the literature. The character of communication among stakeholders in the case study is as follows. Firstly, the administration initiated the project but did not show leadership. This was caused by a gap in understanding about the project between city and borough administrations, Further, the city administration lacked experience with projects that placed an emphasis on fieldwork. Tongjand and Banjang, at ancillary institutions, acted as spokespersons and helped people in the community to understand the administrative process. However, because they led communication and used personal relationships to ensure they communicated effectively, the communication process had limits from the perspective of democratic process. Diverse stakeholders expressed their opinions in the public sphere and communicated about them using diverse media. Finally, experts produced the output, facilitated communication, and mediated in conflicts. Because new experts acted as facilitators and mediators, there was a great deal of trial and error. This project has particular significance: Seoul`s city government deals with urban space rather than parks and green space, which are limited by boundaries; and whether "green" can be used for urban renovation was tested by several landscape architects, who sought to identify a new role in urban renovation, namely, the role of landscape and landscape architecture. However, the project has some limitations, including an insufficiently detailed project plan, a lack of common understanding among stakeholders, and a short timeframe. A number of stakeholders overcame these limitations to a certain degree. Officials of the Borough and the Dong managed the project and resolved civil complaints. Experts provided special information, and contributed to the design and construction of improvements.
 Keywords
Urban Regeneration;Facilitator;Sustainable Community;Governance;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
Bojorquez-Tapia, L. A., H. de la Cueva, S. Diaz, D. Melgarejo, G. Alcantar, M. J. Solares, G. Grobet and G. Cruz-Bello(2004) Environmental conflicts and nature reserves: Redesigning Sierra San Pedro Martir National Park, Mexico. Biological Conservation 117: 111-126. crossref(new window)

2.
Brookfield, S. D.(1986) Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

3.
Bryson, M. J.(2004) What to do when stakeholders matter. Public Management Review 6(1): 21-53. crossref(new window)

4.
Burton, P., R. Goodlad, J. Croft, J. Abbott, A. Hastings, G. Macdonald and T. Slater(2004) What works in community involvement in areabased initiatives? A systematic review of the literature. Home Office Online Reprot 53/04. London: Home Office.

5.
Cosgrove, W. J. and F. R. Rijsberman(2000) World Water Vision - Making Water Everybody's Business. London: Earthscan Publication.

6.
Eden, C. and F. Ackermann(1988) Making Strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

7.
Fischer, F.(2000) Citizens, Experts, and the Environment. London: Duke University Press.

8.
Freeman, R. E.(1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.

9.
Gray, C.(2008)Working TowardsMore Effective and Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization Policies; REVIT Stakeholder Engagement - a toolkit.

10.
Hamdi, N. and R. Goethert(1997) Action Planning for Cities: A Guide to Community Practice. New York: John Wiley.

11.
Handley, J., E. Griffiths, S. Hill and J. Howe(1998) Land restoration using an ecologically informed and participative approach. in H. Fox, H. Moore and A. Mcintosh, eds., Land Reclamation: Archiving Sustainable Benefits. Rotterdam : Balkema. pp. 171-185.

12.
Kim, Y. G and M. Roe(2007) A study on partnerships in the development of parks in UK. Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 35(2): 4-11.

13.
Kim, W. Y.(2013) Resident participatory business seeing from the perspective of Eunpyeong-gu's Maeul community. The Korean Association for Public Society 3(2): 5-35.

14.
Kim, Y. S.(2006) A Study on the Improvement of Korean Basic Administrative Units(Tong.Ban). Master's Degree Dissertation, Kyumg Pook National University. Korea.

15.
Korea Urban Regeneration Cluster(2012) Plan of NewUrban Regeneration.

16.
Kothari, U.(2001) Power, knowledge and social control in participatory development. In B.l Cooke and U. Kothari, eds., Participation: the New Tyranny. New York: Zed Books. pp. 139-152.

17.
Kwon, J. J., J. H. Jo, W. S. Jeon and H. Y. Hwang(2012) Analyses on the influences of the governance participants in the decision making process of urban regeneration project of Jungang-dong, CheongJu-city. Journal of the Korean Urban Management Association 25(2): 325-343.

18.
Kwon, J. J., D. H. Kim and H. Y. Hwang(2011) A dynamic analysis on the influences of the governance decisions for Cheong-ju Won-heungi Eco-Park. Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 39(1): 65-74.

19.
Nelson, N. and S. Wright(1995) Participation and power. in Nelson, N. and S. Wright, eds., Power and Participatory Development: Theory and Practice, London: Intermediate Technology Publication. pp. 1-18.

20.
Reed, M. S.(2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation 141: 2417-2431. crossref(new window)

21.
Rowe, M. and W. Andy(1999) Changing Estates: A Facilitator's Guide to Making Community Environment Projects Work. London: Groundwork Hackney.

22.
Seoul City(2014) Seoul Blooming Flower.

23.
UNCHS Habitat(2001) Tools to Support Participatory Urban Decision Making.

24.
Wandersman, A.(1981) A framework of participation in community organization. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 17: 27-58. crossref(new window)

25.
Wilcox, D.(1994) Community Participation and Empowerment: Putting Theory into Practice. New York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

26.
Yoon, H.(2012) Management and improvement of distressed urban areas through the partnership among stakeholders. The Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea 28(9): 231-242.

27.
www.ncppp.org : The National Council for Public-Private Partnerships 웹사이트