resume jurnal perencanaan tapak

8/18/2019 Resume Jurnal Perencanaan Tapak

1/14

Integrating the Community in Urban Design and Planning of PublicSpaces: A Review in Malaysian Cities


2/14 i

IDENTITAS JURNAL

JUDUL : Integrating the Community in Urban Design and Planning of Public Spaces: A

Review in Malaysian Cities

PENULIS : Wan Aslina Wan Ismail dan Ismail Said

PENERBIT : Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

TH TERBIT : 2015

VOLUME : 168


3/14 1

Integrating the Community in Urban Design and Planning of Public

Spaces: A Review in Malaysan Cities

PENDAHULUAN

Partisipasi komunitas adalah fokusan utama dalam proses perencanaan perkotaan

dalam arsitektur lansekap. Partisipasi komunitas menandakan keterlibatan anggota

komunitas dalam hubungan antara program-program perencanaan pengembangan secara

keseluruhan dan pemerintah lokal. Menurut Creighton (2005) dan Sanoff (2000), konsep

keterlibatan publik adalah untuk mengurangi skeptisisme masyarakat terhadap pemerintah,

membangun konsensus stakeholder dalam pemerintah, serta meningkatkan administrasi

pengambilan keputusan.

Untuk mengilustrasikan dinamika keberlanjutan, Pemerintah Malaysia menyadari

bahwa partisipasi publik merupakan bagian yang tidak bisa dipisahkan dari pembangunan

berkelanjutan dan pemerintahan yang baik. Menurut Omar dan Leh (2009), partisipasi publik

tidak hanya merupakan sebuah alternatif untuk perencanaan yang lebih baik, namun

merupakan sebuah kebutuhan seperti yang terdapat dalam hukum perencanaan. Selain itu,

masyarakat memiliki hak untuk tahu dan berpartisipasi dalam pengambilan keputusan,

khususnya dalam isu-isu yang berpotensi menimbulkan dampak terhadap masyarakat dan

wilayah tempat tinggal mereka.

Di Malaysia, partisipasi mayarakat adalah wajib dalam proses persiapan

pengembangan struktural maupun lokal. Dalam perencanaan ruang publik, pembangunan

berkelanjutan meliputi isu-isu sosial, ekonomi dan lingkungan yang fokus pada generasi yang

akan datang. Penelitian terhadap persepsi dan perilaku masyarakat terhadap suatu tempat

adalah langkah awal untuk mengetahui arti sebuah tempat dalam usaha untuk

menginformasikan proses perencanaan. Dalam menciptakan sebuah desain yang

berkelanjutan bagi masyarakat, keterlibatan masyarakat di sini adalah dengan mengijinkan

mereka untuk menganalisa masalah-masalah mereka dan merancang solusinya sertamendukung inisiatif masyarakat yang mana untuk memperbolehkan mereka menjadi

instrumen perubahan mereka sendiri.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah pendekatan-pendekatan dalam

perencanaan kota sudah mengakomodasi kebutuhan masyarakat dan keterlibatannya dalam

pengambilan keputusan, serta membandingkan antara negara maju dengan negara

berkembang tentang pegintegrasian masyarakat ke dalam perancangan ruang publik di kota-

kota di Malaysia.


4/14 2

TINJAUAN PUSTAKA

Partisipasi Masyarakat

Partisipasi masyarakat adalah sebuah proses dimana perhatian, nilai, dan kebutuhan

masyarakat dimasukkan ke dalam pengambilan keputusan pemerintahan dan badan hukum.

Partisipasi masyarakat merupakan komunikasi dan interaksi dua arah, dengan tujuan

memperoleh keputusan yang lebih baik yang didukung oleh masyarakat (Creighton, 2005).

Konsep Sistem Perencanaan di Malaysia

Saat ini, pelibatan masyarakat diterima sebagai tahap yang krusial dalam

perencanaan, terutama dalam persiapan rencana. Hal ini untuk memastikan bahwa

masyarakat telah dilibatkan dan memiliki hak untuk mendapat informasi dalam perencanaan

wilayah mereka. Sebagai contoh, partisipasi masyarakat adalah faktor vital untuk memastikan

bahwa isu dan kebutuhan dari masyarakat lokal telah terjawab. Pelibatan masyarakat yang

digunakan melalui survey langsung dan FGD, via internet, serta email. Dalam Town and

Country Planning Act 1976 ( Act 172) Bab 9 mengatakan bahwa dalam mempersiapkan

rencana struktur negara, laporan survey yang memuat temuan kunci dari daerah studi harus

dipublikasi. Setelah rancangan rencana struktur selesai dibuat, maka selanjutnya dilakukan

publikasi untuk ditinjau oleh masyarakat. Pemberitahuan kepada masyarakat dilakukan

melalui koran lokal. Masyarakat diberi waktu kurang dari satu bulan sejak tanggal

pemberitahuan, namun dapat diperpanjang melalui permintaan stakeholder. Rencana wilayah

lokal dan wilayah khusus juga berlaku hal yang sama.

Isu yang Ada Serta Pembatasan Masalah

Efektivitas dari metode partisipasi masyarakat ini masih diperdebatkan. Menurut Innes

dan Booher (2005), program-program biasanya tidak mengizinkan untuk bertukar tempat,

meskipun biasanya peserta rapat diperbolehkan untuk bertanya. Masyarakat tidak

mempunyai jatah jawaban atas pertanyaan mereka. Dalam meningkatkan proses

pengambilan keputusan, lembaga perencanaan seharusnya memastikan akses masyarakat

terhadap informasi yang relevan, memfasilitasi penerimaan pandangan masyarakat serta

mengizinkan partisipasi yang efektif.

Mohamed Anuar dan Saruwono (2013) mengemukakan bahwa halangan yang datang

dari isu-isu seperti jangka waktu partisipasi, kapasitas masyarakat, interaksi antar stakeholder,

transparansi dalam pengambilan keputusan dan keuangan dapat dibuktikan sebagai

halangan utama dari partisipasi masyarakat dalam proses perancangan. Penelitian tersebut

juga mengungkapkan bahwa partisipasi publik masih jarang menjadi kebutuhan klien. Hal inimenunjukkan bahwa tugas dari arsitek lansekap adalah sebatas untuk memenuhi kebutuhan


5/14


6/14 4

pemimpin kota bahwa adapeluang perubahan yangmudah dalam status quo .

GREENSPACENYC Mengembangkan kelompokskala besar, dan mengadakanevent , kelas, dan workshop

mengenai studi keberlanjutan.Tujuannya adalah untukmembangun jaringan daripeserta yang berminatmenyebarkan informasi padamasyarakat luas dengan biayayang sedikit atau pun tanpabiaya.

Event gratis, diskusi danproyek.

Sumber: Ismail dan Said, 2015

Faktor-faktor yang berkontribusi terhadap efektivitas dari program-program yang

dijalankan oleh organisasi non pemerintahan antara lain.

1. Strategi dan pendekatan yang digunakan sangat berhubungan dekat dengan

masyarakat dan diwujudkan dalam skala kecil ketimbang melibatkan komunitas dalam

skala besar. Hal ini lebih mudah untuk mendapatkan pendapat mereka.

2. Masyarakat lokal dapat berkolaborasi dan berbagi pendapat serta gagasan untuk

meningkatkan kualitas kota tempat mereka tinggal menggunakan komunikasi dua arah

dengan perwakilan mereka.

3. Masyarakat dibimbing oleh konsultan (perencana, perancang, ahli lingkungan,

seniman, developer , dll) untuk memberikan gagasan mereka terhadap jalan,lingkungan dan kota dengan inovasi-inovasi.

KESIMPULAN

Otoritas perencanaan daerah adalah lembaga yang pantas untuk bertindak sebagai

organizer dalam program partisipasi publik yang telah disetujui oleh mayoritas penduduk lokal

di sebuah wilayah. Namun, organizer dari program partisipasi masyarakat seharusnya

mempertimbangkan aksi yang lebih baik untuk meningkatkan kepercayaan masyarakat. Ada

beberapa cara untuk meningkatkan efektivitas dari program partisipasi masyarakat. Salahsatunya adalah proses pengambilan keputusan, dimana pemerintah terutama perencana kota

seharusnya menyediakan mekanisme terbaik untuk lebih banyak lagi partisipasi masyarakat

dalam proses perencanaan. Seluruh masyarakat seharusnya dapat diakomodasi untuk

mengambil tantangan untuk pertumbuhan yang berkelanjutan dari sebuah pengembangan.

Partisipasi masyarakat seharusnya dapat dipertimbangkan sebagai salah satu acuan

dalam pengimplementasian rencana daerah. Isi dari rencana tersebut sangat penting sebagai

bukti dari representasi masyarakat untuk terpenuhi haknya dalam rencana daerah.


7/14

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 168 ( 2015 ) 357 – 364

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ ).Peer-review under responsibility of Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying,Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.241

AicE-Bs2014Berlin(formerly AicE-Bs2014Magdeburg)

Asia Pacific International Conference on Environment-Behaviour StudiesSirius Business Park Berlin-yard field, Berlin, 24-26 February 2014

“Public Participation: Shaping a sustainable future”

Integrating the Community in Urban Design and Planning ofPublic Spaces: A review in Malaysian cities

Wan Azlina Wan Ismaila*

, Ismail Said b

a Faculty of Creative Technology and Heritage, University Malaysia Kelantan Locked Bag No.01, 16300, Bachok, Kelantan Darul

Naimb Faculty of Built Environment, University Technology Malaysia UTM Skudai, 81310 Johor, Malaysia

Abstract

Both disciplines of Landscape architecture and Urban Planning prepare a development plan for public spaces in citiesand towns. Much of the design and planning of the spaces are done by the landscape architect and urban plannerswithout community participation. This practice results in incompatibility of the spaces for the communities;underutilizing or abandoning the spaces, and worse vandalizing the properties of the spaces. This paper argues thatcommunity participation in the design and planning of urban public spaces can draw residents to establish a sense of

attachment that may lead to community maintaining the spaces. A plethora of studies in human geography, urbansociology, landscape architecture and urban planning were reviewing the themes of community participation in the

planning of public spaces. It is found that community participation needs to be underpinned by a philosophy thatemphasises empowerment, equity, trust and learning. The quality of decisions made through community participationis strongly reliable on the nature of the process leading to them.

© 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

Keywords: Community participation; public places; urban design; landscape planning

1. Introduction

Community participation is a central concern for urban planning process in landscape architecture.However, the challenge and difficulties for planners to implement such approaches to the preeminent

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +609-779 7000; fax: +609-7797262. E-mail address : [email protected].

© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ ).Peer-review under responsibility of Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying,Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.241&domain=pdfhttp://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.241&domain=pdf


8/14

358 Wan Azlina Wan Ismail and Ismail Said / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 168 ( 2015 ) 357 – 364

inherent in the typical community involvement process become crucial issues. Community participationsignifies the direct involvement of community members in the affairs of the overall development planning

programmes and governance at the local level. According to Creighton (2005) and Sanoff (2000), theidea of public involvement is advocated to reduce citizen scepticism toward government, buildstakeholder consensus in government, and enhance administrative decision making. These participationtheories have been presented and examined in previous researches.

To illustrate the dynamic of sustainability, the Malaysian Government recognizes that public participation is an integral part of sustainable development and good governance. Through various effortsof government agencies, public participation becomes an important element in governmental decisionmaking and planning processes (Mohamed Anuar & Saruwono, 2013). As supported by Omar & Leh(2009), who examine that the public participation is not just an alternative for better planning, but is arequirement as stated in the planning law. Furthermore, the community has the right to know and

participate in decision-makings, particularly in issues which potentially affect the communities and theareas in which they live and work.

In Malaysia, public participation is co mpulsory in the process of preparing development plans bothstructural and local. In planning of public spaces, sustainable development encompasses social,environmental and economic issues which concern to present and future generations. Studies on the

people’s perceptions and attitudes toward places began to explore the meaning of place in an effort toinform the planning process. In search of realizing sustainable development, the act of community

participation has been observed as one of the way forward in achieving this endeavour. As described byLoures & Crawford (2008), public participation begins by laying the base for sustainable practices in

planning and management of the physical environment as well as landscape architecture. In creating asustainable design for communities, it involves local citizens by allowing them to analyse their own

problems and fashion their own solutions plus by supporting community initiatives in which to allowthem to be the instruments of their own change.

However, what is being questioned in this paper is that, given our knowledge that integrating thecommunity in a Malaysian planning system is a crucial need, does the current approaches in urban design

planning is adequate enough as they need and endeavour are not being addressed in decision making

level? Therefore, this paper argues that community involvement and critical comparison between the practice of developed and developing countries in integrating the community in designing public spacesto Malaysian cities.

2. Literature review

Good governance requires better communication within a society. With the aim of achieving thesustainable development, the need for greater levels of public discourse and participation, commonunderstanding of issues and general democratisation of planning and policy processes have becomewidely accepted. It can be argued that community participation needs to be underpinned by a philosophythat emphasises empowerment, equity, trust and learning. Therefore, an effective public participation

programme will increase the level of co-operation between planning authorities and public to achieve a parallel planning goal, which will benefit all parties. The design of an effective public involvement programme requires both skill and effort. As such, it is important for this study to examine theeffectiveness of the existing public participation programmes, in order to improve the public participation

programme in the preparation process of the development plan.


9/14

359Wan Azlina Wan Ismail and Ismail Said / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 168 ( 2015 ) 357 – 364

2.1. Community participation

Public participation is the process by which the public concerns, needs and values are incorporatedinto governmental and corporate decision making. It is a two way communication and interaction, withthe overall aim of better decisions that are supported by the public (Creighton, 2005). According to theWorld Bank Participation Sourcebook (2003), participation is a process through which a communityinfluences and shares control over development initiatives and the decisions and resources that affectthem. Public participation can be seen as a logical extension of the democratic process in more local,direct, deliberative ways (Pimbert & Wakeford, 2001). Regardless, it involves citizens in the planning

process which helps ensure a plan that will be more widely accepted by its future users (Burby, 2003;Brody et al., 2003; Miraftab, 2003).

2.1.1. Importance of planning processThe issue of political discordant among different groups motivates the government to involve citizens

in decision making to reduce potentially unpopular or questionable decisions (Wang, 2001). Thus, inSeptember 2007 the Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act 2007 [Act A1312] was againamended in which to confer the executive authority on the Federal Government over certain matters inrelation to the control and regulation of town and country planning in Peninsular Malaysia. The Townand Country Planning Act 1976 (Act 172) and its subsequent amendments stated the provision of public

participation in Sections 9 (1, 2 and 3), 12A, 13, 14 and 15. This ensures that public participation ismandatory in the formulation of development plans in the country.

2.2. The concept of planning system in Malaysia

Currently, in Malaysia community involvement is accepted as a crucial stage in planning especiallythe preparation plan. This is to ensure that the people are involved and have the right to be informed in

planning their areas. As such, public participation is a vital factor to ensure that the local issues and theneeds of the local people are being addressed.

Conventionally, participation from the citizens embrace various mechanisms which include public

hearings, citizen forums, community or neighbourhood meetings, community outreaches, citizen advisorygroups, and individual citizen representation. Citizen surveys and focus groups, the internet, and e-mailare also used. Apparently, in the Town and Country Planning Act 1976 (Act 172) Section 9 stated that in

preparing for a state structure plan, the report of survey which contains key findings of the study areamust be publicised. This is to give an opportunity for the citizens to make representations. Aftercompletion of the draft structure plan, it should be made available for public inspection. Notification tothe public is done through local newspapers. The public is given no less than one month from the date ofnotice to review and can be extended upon request from the stakeholders. As for the local plans andspecial area plan the same procedure applies as stated in section 13 of the Act 172. There is an additional

provision introduced by the amendment of Act 172 in 2001 (Act A1129), which requires publicity has to be g iven to a proposed plan even before its preparation. Section 12A stated that publicity should includethe objectives, the purpose and matters in the proposed plan of a local plan or special area plan. The

amendment is very vital because it allows public participation from the early stage of plan preparation.The need for public participation in planning is sufficiently provided for by the Act 172 and itssubsequent amendments.


10/14


2.3. The issue and limitations

The effectiveness of these public participation methods is debatable and it is indeed the most rigidway of public participation. As examined by Innes & Booher (2005), the programme typically does notallow for interchange, although occasionally a board member may ask a question. Citizens have noentitlement to answers to their questions. The public compelled to know the details of the planningissues, scopes, constraints and detail information. The information related to the subject matter shallinclude any available information in writing, visual, oral or database form on the state of the environmentand impacts of developments, as well as any available environmental management programmes andmeasures. In improving decision-making processes, planning authority should ensure the public access torelevant information, facilitate the reception of public views and allow for effective participation.Mohamed Anuar & Saruwono (2013) pointed that obstacles coming from issues such as timing of

participation, the capacity of the public, interaction among stakeholders, transparency in decision makingand cost could prove to be some of the major obstacles of public participation in the design process. Thestudy has also revealed that public participation is seldom a requirement of the client. It means thatlandscape architects are carrying their duty just to fulfil the requirement of the clients. These limitationsare often a result of factors such as misunderstanding, mistrust, intolerance and conflict (Madonsela,2010).

2.3.1. Place attachment to community participationTo a certain extent, understanding how particular pref erences, perceptions, and emotional connections

to place relate to community social cohesion, an organized participation and community development issignificant. The appreciation through the theory of place attachment and meaning that has been exploredwidely and aid us in environmental and community psychology. Often the focus in communitydevelopment and planning is on economic, political, or social dynamics both within the community and

between the community and public agencies. However, the unique qualities and meanings of the specific physical setting in which community planning and development take place can play a critical role in the process as well. The thoughts, feelings, and beliefs about the local community places, in what psychologists call “intra - psychic” phenomena show the impact of our behaviours toward such places, thusinfluencing whether and how we might participate in local planning efforts (Manzo & Perkins, 2006).

Place attachment is an affective bond between people and places (Altman and Low, 1992). It has also been linked to community cleanup and revitalization efforts (Brown, Perkins, and Brown 2003). Hence place attachment, in influencing individual and group behaviour, affect communities at large.Unfortunately, many studies have ignored this place-based psychological ties to the community, althoughit can be used to make a critical contribution to effective community development and planning efforts,hence provided as a source of community power and collective action.

3. Method

This study presents a review of integrating community participation in planning process carried out by

non-governmental organizations. The review identified the effectiveness of particular approaches indealing with public participation programs done by local governments. The strategies and approachesused in those programs were evaluated between system practises in Malaysia. In this paper, threeexamples of organizations based in New York City have been used to illustrate this contrast between whatcan be called a top-down and a bottom-up urban approach.


11/14


Table 1. Strategies and approaches dealing with public participation

Organization Approaches StrategiesProject for Public

Spaces (PPS)Place-making-

Involves looking at, Listening to, and Asking questions of the people who live, work and

play in a particular space,To discover peoples' needs and aspirations. The

information is then used to create a common vision for that place.

Beginning with small-scale, do-able improvementsthat can immediately bring

benefits to public spaces and

the people who use them.

URBANSPACEship

The goal is To network, Talk, Interact, Exchange thoughts and ideas, Collaborate on projects, and turn fascinating ideas into

concrete initiatives.Believes in the concept of tactical urbanism which is the

principle that citizens can undertake direct low-cost, high-reward actions that immediately improve some aspect of a

community’s public life and demonstrate to city leaders thatthere are opportunities for easy, successful changes to thestatus quo.

Implements small-scale projects, for instance at thelevel of the neighbourhood,they can collaborate and sharetheir thoughts and ideas forimproving the city they live in.

GREENSPACENYC It develops Hosts, and Curates participatory events, classes, Workshops, and installations regarding sustainability

studiesTo build a network of committed participants interested

in sharing information to the broader public for free or littlecost.

free events, discussionsand projects.

4. Results and discussion

When it comes to planning of urban public spaces, it must be associated w ith the concept of socialfunction. The community role and contribution of the public space today is a growing concern withinurban areas. Through urban design and planning, public spaces are indeed often meant to improve sociallife, enhance the social interactions between urban dwellers, and therefore build stronger communitieswithin the city. It is believed that community participation is a crucial part in the improvement of publicspaces and consequently the quality of social life within the city. In order to improve the social lifewithin an urban area, without input from the public, relying only on designers and urban planners as wellas landscape architects are not enough to build a good public space. Increasingly, what is decisive in thecreation of a good public space is the vision of the urban dwellers themselves and their own needs and

preferences regarding the spaces they live in. Through community participation, in contrast with decision-making at a higher level without co-operation, the overall quality of life within an urban area can be better

improved especially with regards to the design of public spaces.The three examples of organizations based in New York City have been used to illustrate this contrast

between what can be called a top-down and a bottom-up urban approach. Project for Public Spaces (PPS) is a well-known organization within the city of New York. PPS is a

non-profit planning, design and educational organization dedicated to helping people create andsustain public spaces that build stronger communities. Their innovative approach known as‘Placemaking’ perfectly illustrates the crucial importance of community in building better public


12/14


spaces and consequently better cities. Indeed, it involves looking at, listening to, and asking questionsof the people who live, work and play in a particular space, to discover their needs and aspirations.This information is then used to create a common vision for that place. The vision can evolve quicklyinto an implementation strategy, beginning with small-scale, do-able improvements that canimmediately bring benefits to public spaces and the people who use them. PPS worked on andcontributed many projects within the city of New York such as the Rockefeller Plaza, Bryant Park orWilliamsburg Walks.

URBAN SPACEship is a group that is meant to bring together urbanists, planners, designers,environmentalists, artists, developers and anyone else interested in infusing their streets,neighbourhoods and cities with innovation. The goal is to network, talk, interact, exchange thoughtsand ideas, collaborate on projects, and turn fascinating ideas into concrete initiatives. This organizationstrongly believes in the concept of tactical urbanism which is the principle that citizens can undertakedirect low-cost, high- reward actions that immediately improve some aspect of a community’s publiclif e and demonstrate to city leaders that there are opportunities for easy, successful changes to thestatus quo. This organization implements small-scale projects, for instance at the level of theneighbourhood, in order to get in touch with the urban dwellers and make them feel concerned abouttheir neighbourhood, the point being that they can collaborate and share their thoughts and ideas for

improving the city they live in. GREENSPACENYC is a New York based NGO whose goal is to build a sustainable communitywithin the city of New York. It develops, hosts, and curates participatory events, classes, workshops,and installations regarding sustainability studies in order to build a network of committed participantsinterested in sharing information to the broader public for free or little cost. The group is committed tothe goal of facilitating a green community in the city through free events, discussions and projects.They have done all of their work only with the help of volunteers, demonstrating again the crucial roleof community in building green public spaces within the city.The factors that contributed to the effectiveness of the programs organized by those NGOs are:

The strategies and approaches used are very closely related and directed to the community and werecarried out in small scale rather than involving the large scale of the community. It is easier to draw

near and listen to their feedback and opinions. The local citizens can collaborate and share their thoughts and ideas for improving the city they live inthrough two way communication with representatives.

Community were guided by the consultant (planners, designers, environmentalists, artists, developersetc.) to give ideas on their streets, neighbourhoods and cities with innovation.To examine people-place attachment and relationships at the individual level analysis, largely because

of the focus on subjective experience. While this study understands how integrating the community inurban design and planning of public space affect the individual perceptions and feelings while at the sametime impact community members’ actions toward their local environment. Given t hat conflicts amongvarious community members can sometimes emerge in the planning process, exploring how placeattachments influence people’s motivations and behaviours in the community planning and development

process is an important goal. For example, proposed development projects can be perceived by somecommunity members as a threat to place attachments because they will change the physical fabric of theneighbourhood. Those who feel their relationships to their community places are threatened byredevelopment may consequently resist a proposal regardless of its potential value. To adequatelyunderstand and respond to such reactions, it is critical to uncover and address these covert placeattachments. Conversely, if such feelings and experiences are not well addressed, disruptions could dividea community.


13/14


The analysis also compared the less effectiveness of the local government approaches in gaining publicattention into participation of urban planning. This is due to unclear content being delivered to thecommunity. For instance, a study by Omar & Leh (2009) stated that 23. 3% of respondents felt that the

programme was ineffective while another 73% response were moderate. The approaches that usedincluded banners and presentations. The public participation program also faced weaknesses when 50%of respondents felt that the program failed to deliver enough information on the future development of thearea. The public were expecting more details or comprehensive information on the future developmentfor their areas. The finding is supported by another result from another research done by MohamedAnuar & Saruwono (2013) which pointed out that obstacles coming from such issues as (i) timing of

participation, (ii) the capacity of the public, interaction among stakeholders, (iii) transparency in decisionmaking and (iv) cost that could prove to be some of the major obstacles of public participation in thedesign process of public parks. Therefore, the issue of public participation as not a requirement by theclient as a major barrier.

Organising the public participation programme to the loc al citizens should consider the needs andrights of the community as a stakeholder. The approaches delivered to the community ought to ensurethat the community received the ample information on future development in their specific area. Theinformation and approaches must be understandable.

5. Conclusion and recommendations

The local planning authority is t he proper agency to act as an organiser for the public participation programme as agreed by a majority of local citizens of certain area. However, the organiser of the public participation programme should consider better actions to increase the public trust. There are few ways toimprove the effectiveness of the public participation programme. This includes the decision making

process, whereby the government especially the town planners should always provide the best mechanismfor more effective public participation in the local planning process. The whole community should beaccommodated to take up the challenge for a sustainable growth of development. A holistic approach todecision making bringing together the social, economic and physical environmental issues to ensure that

the environment is being developed to benefit the present community and the future generation. It means providing for effective participation at all levels of strategic planning, providing clear, comprehensive andeffective community involvement in local decision-making and providing a robust regulatory frameworkon which the public and local government can rely with some certainty.

The public participation should be considered as one of the guidance in the implementation of districtlocal plan. The content of the plan is very important as an evidence of the community representation tofulfil their right in the local plan.

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the University Malaysia Kelantan (UMK) for the financial assistance ofthis study and hearties gratitude for Faculty of Creative Technologies and Heritage for the continuoussupport and making this manuscript possible.


14/14


References

Anuar, M. I. N. M., & Saruwono, M. (2013). Obstacles of Public Participation in the Design Process of Public Parks .Brody, S. D., Godschalk, D. R., & Burby, R. J. (2003). Mandating citizen participation in plan making: Six strategic planning

choices. Journal of the American Planning Association , 69(3) , 245-264.Brown, B., Perkins, D. D., & Brown, G. (2003). Place attachment in a revitalizing neighbourhood: Individual and block levels of

analysis. Journal of environmental psychology , 23(3), 259-271.Burby, R. J. (2003). Making plans that matter: Citizen involvement and government action. Journal of the American Planning

Association , 69(1), 33-49.Creighton, J. L. (2005). The public participation handbook: making better decisions through citizen involvement . Wiley. com.Government of Malaysia. (2007). Town and Country Planning Act 2007 (Act 1312). Federal Department of Town and Country

Planning, Kuala Lumpur.Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2000). Public participation in planning: New strategies for the 21st century. Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E.(2005). Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st Century . UC Berkeley: Institute of

Urban and Regional Development. Retrieved from: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/4gr9b2v5Loures, L. U. I. S., & Crawford, C. (2008). Democracy in progress: Using public participation in post-industrial landscape (re)-

development. WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development , 4, 794-803.Low, S. M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place attachment. Springer US. (pp. 1-12).Madonsela, T. K. (2010). Community Participation in Planning Process. Manzo, L. C., & Perkins, D. D. (2006). Finding common ground: The importance of place attachment to community participation

and planning. Journal of Planning Literature , 20(4), 335-350.Miraftab, F. (2003). The perils of participatory discourse: Housing policy in post-apartheid South Africa. Journal of Planning

Education and Research, 22 (3), 226-39.Omar, D. B., & Leh, O. L. H. (2009). Malaysian development planning system: Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan and public

participation. Asian Social Science , 5(3), 30.Pimbert, M., & Wakeford, T. (2001). Overview: Deliberative democracy and citizen empowerment. PLA notes , 40, 23-28.Sanoff, H. (2000). Community participation methods in design and planning. New York: Wiley. Wang, X. (2001). Assessing public participation in US cities. Public Performance & Management Review , 322-336.

resume jurnal perencanaan tapak

Documents