The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mandating Citizen Participation in Plan Making:Six Strategic Planning Choices
Abstract
In addition to requiring that local governments plan for and manage urban development, state growth management laws require that citizens be given an opportunity to participate in the local planning process. In this article, we examine the strengths and weaknesses of citizen involvement mandates and the degree to which mandates and related local planning practices have resulted in broader citizen participation in plan making. We show that mandates do indeed affect local government attention to citizen involvement and that the choices planners make in crafting citizen involvement programs do affect the resulting level of public participation. Based on these results, we make suggestions for improving the efficacy of state growth management legislation and local planning practice directed toward enhancing citizen involvement in local planning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Ladder Of Citizen Participation
Arnstein, S. R. (1969) · Journal of the American Institute of Planners · doi:10.1080/01944366908977225 · Cited by 17,064
Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management
Roush, D. (2002) · Electronic Green Journal · doi:10.5070/g311610473 · Cited by 1,280
Planning Through Consensus Building: A New View of the Comprehensive Planning Ideal
Innes, J. E. (1996) · Journal of the American Planning Association · doi:10.1080/01944369608975712 · Cited by 714
The question of participation: Toward Authentic public participation in public administration
King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O. (1998) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.2307/977561 · Cited by 702
Making Plans that Matter:Citizen Involvement and Government Action
Burby, R. J. (2003) · Journal of the American Planning Association · doi:10.1080/01944360308976292 · Cited by 631
Self-citationThe Question of Participation: Toward Authentic Public Participation in Public Administration
King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O. (2018) · Democracy, Bureaucracy, and the Study of Administration · doi:10.4324/9780429501036-20 · Cited by 613
Planning Through Consensus Building: A New View of the Comprehensive Planning Ideal
Innes, J. (2018) · Classic Readings in Urban Planning · doi:10.4324/9781351179522-13 · Cited by 570
Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning
Sanoff, H. (1999) · Cited by 569
Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning
Yabes, R. (2000) · Landscape and Urban Planning · doi:10.1016/s0169-2046(00)00063-3 · Cited by 544
The Rebirth of Urban Democracy.
Dreier, P., Berry, J. M., Portney, K. E., & Thomson, K. (1994) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2076079 · Cited by 401
Cited by
Designing Public Participation Processes
Bryson, J. M., Quick, K. S., Slotterback, C. S., & Crosby, B. C. (2013) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02678.x · Cited by 626
Metadata
- Authors
- Brody, S. D., Godschalk, D. R., & Burby, R. J.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Planning Association
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-09-30
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 245-264
- ISSN
- 0194-4363 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-0130
- OpenAlex
- W2068178551
- Cited by
- 313
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 54.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mandating Citizen Participation in Plan Making:Six Strategic Planning Choices. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01944360308978018
- The paper
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360308978018
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
