A STUDY ON THE STRUCTURAL GAPS BETWEEN OFFICIAL PARTICIPATION NARRATIVES AND RESIDENTS’ PARTICIPATION PERCEPTIONS IN THE MICRO-RENEWAL OF PUBLIC SPACES IN OLD RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v24i43.2090Keywords:
Public spaces in old residential communities, Micro-renewal, Public Participation, Structural Gaps, Participation PerceptionAbstract
With the transition of urban renewal in China from large-scale redevelopment to micro-renewal of existing built-up areas, public participation has become an increasingly institutionalized component in the renewal of public spaces in old residential communities. However, how institutionalized participation translates into residents’ lived participation experiences remains insufficiently understood, resulting in persistent discrepancies between official participation narratives and residents’ participation perceptions. This study adopts an exploratory cross-case analysis based on preliminary site observations, unstructured interviews, and official narrative materials from six micro-renewal projects in Shanghai to examine how public participation operates in practice. The findings identify three recurring types of structural gaps: information gaps, procedural gaps, and meaning gaps. These gaps emerge from mismatches in information transmission, limited visibility of participatory processes, and differences in how participation is interpreted and experienced by residents. The results suggest that participation effectiveness is not determined solely by the presence of formal procedures, but is shaped by the interaction of communication practices, institutional implementation, professional translation, and trust relationships. By conceptualizing these discrepancies as structurally recurrent gaps, this study provides a mechanism-oriented explanation of the divergence between institutionalized participation and lived experiences. It advances existing public participation research by shifting the focus from procedural arrangements to experiential processes, and contributes to a more nuanced understanding of participation–design interaction in micro-renewal contexts. The findings also offer practical implications for improving participation mechanisms and design communication.
Downloads
References
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
Boland, A., & Zhu, J. (2012). Public participation in China’s green communities: Mobilizing memories and structuring incentives. Geoforum, 43(1), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.07.010
Carmona, M. (2019). Principles for public space design, planning to do better. Urban Design International, 24, 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-018-0070-3
Chen, F. (2025). Spatial design professional-led multi-stakeholders and community participation in co-creating a walkable and inclusive public space. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2025.2498723
Chen, W., Wang, L., & Ye, C. (2021). An analysis of the patterns of public participation in old communities micro regeneration in Guangzhou. Shanghai Urban Planning Review, (6), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.11982/j.supr.20210611
Hamideh, S. (2020). Opportunities and challenges of public participation in post disaster recovery planning: Lessons from Galveston, TX. Natural Hazards Review, 21(4), 05020009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000399
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2018). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315147949
Lu, X. (2020). Analysis and policy recommendations for public participation in urban regeneration projects in China. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 960(3), 032028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/960/3/032028
Marzukhi, M. A., Abdullah, J., Leh, O. L. H., Zanudin, K., & Danial, M. H. (2022). The challenges of public participation in the Malaysian planning system. Planning Malaysia, 20(4), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v20i23.1161
Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. (2021, August 30). Notice on preventing large-scale demolition and construction in the implementation of urban renewal actions [Policy notice]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2021-08/31/content_5634560.htm
Parés, M., Bonet-Martí, J., & Martí-Costa, M. (2012). Does participation really matter in urban regeneration policies? Exploring governance networks in Catalonia, Spain. Urban Affairs Review, 48(2), 238–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087411423352
Prilenska, V., & Liias, R. (2015). Challenges of recent participatory urban design practices in Riga. Procedia Economics and Finance, 21, 88–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00154-9
Shanghai Municipal Bureau of Planning and Natural Resources. (2020). Reply to Proposal No. 0775 of the Third Session of the 15th Shanghai Municipal People’s Congress [Government reply]. https://ghzyj.sh.gov.cn/jyta/20200813/ab64b7e586354092b6d3984882a43c0d.html
Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences (Vol. 48). Sage.
Sun, S., Chen, R., Qin, S., & Liu, L. (2022). Evaluating the public participation processes in community regeneration using the EPST model: A case study in Nanjing, China. Land, 11(9), 1405. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091405
Wang, Y., Wu, F., & Zhang, F. (2025). Participatory micro-regeneration: Governing urban redevelopment in Qinghe, Beijing. Urban Geography, 46(1), 21–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2024.2349449
Watson, V. (2014). Co-production and collaboration in planning – The difference. Planning Theory & Practice, 15(1), 62–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2013.866266
Wu, J., Li, W., Xu, W., & Yuan, L. (2023). Measuring resident participation in the renewal of older residential communities in China under policy change. Sustainability, 15(3), 2751. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032751
Xue, X., Wang, X., & Li, L. (2021). Public participation oriented community planner practice: Changqiao No. 4 Village, Xuhui District. Planners, 37(S1), 25–31.
Yang, N., Bose, M., & Horrigan, P. (2025). Landscape architecture as democratic practice: Learning from participatory methods and motivations in community-engaged design. Landscape Research, 50(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2024.2409745
Yao, Z., & Li, H. (2024). Research on collaborative governance of old community renovation based on the SFIC model: A case study of Shanghai. Modern Urban Research, (6), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-6000.2024.06.004
Yue, Y., Lin, N., & Gong, K. (2021). Urban community public space micro-renewal environmental planning—Take Datang Xiang community as an example. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 693, 012107. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/693/1/012107
Zanudin, K., Ngah, I., Misnan, S. H., Marzukhi, M. A., & Abdullah, Y. A. (2022). Community participation in the urban planning decision-making process among the low-income segment in Iskandar Malaysia. Planning Malaysia, 20(4), 222–239. https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v20i23.1163
Zanudin, K., Abdullah, Y. A., Bidin, Z. A., Yakob, H., & Zhang, A. (2024). Is community participation in urban planning in Iskandar Malaysia effective enough? A qualitative exploration. Planning Malaysia, 22(2), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v22i31.1469
Zhang, B., Guo, W., Xing, Z., & Zhou, R. (2022). Current situation and sustainable renewal strategies of public space in Chinese old communities. Sustainability, 14(11), 6723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116723
Zhu, J. (2023). Public space and its publicness in people-oriented urban regeneration: A case study of Shanghai. Journal of Urban Affairs, 47(7), 2319–2338. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2023.2279597
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
Copyright & Creative Commons Licence
eISSN: 0128-0945 © Year. The Authors. Published for Malaysian Institute of Planners. This is an open-access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.
The authors hold the copyright without restrictions and also retain publishing rights without restrictions.
