High-Performance Public Involvement: Frameworks, Performance Measures, and Data
Abstract
In the light of social and political currents calling for increased accountability for public processes and discussions between federal officials about the performance of the public involvement process, this paper examines public involvement in transportation and develops frameworks for identifying suitable approaches and evaluating outcomes. The aims of this paper are to (a) foster analytic, evidence-driven discussion between public involvement professionals, project managers, consultants, and other members of the transportation community about process quality metrics and (b) propose strategies for increasing performance of such processes by developing multidimensional process evaluation frameworks for public involvement design and outcomes. A significant Arnstein gap is identified in the quality of public involvement in transportation. A critical overview of current practice that draws on the literature on public involvement and participation is presented. Using a soft systems approach, the authors frame participation methods in distributive domain and define outcome performance criteria. The authors examine the literature on process performance in environmental management and other participation research and propose four process performance metrics for public involvement: quality, inclusion, clarity, and efficiency. Objective data from projects in structured public involvement are presented. These data illustrate that processes that satisfy these metrics will help to close the Arnstein gap by identifying stronger methodologies for involving large groups of citizens with diverse values, delivering objectively high stakeholder-evaluated process quality, and integrating these valuations into effective decision support systems for project managers and engineers. However, this improvement will require a philosophical shift to a higher level on the Arnstein ladder.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
1. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. National Transportation Statistics. Table 3-25a: Federal, State, and Local Government Transportation-Related Revenues and Expenditures, Fiscal Year 2009. http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2006/html/table_03_25a.html. Accessed Nov. 14, 2014.
2. Weiner E. Urban Transportation Planning in the United States: An Historical Overview. Praeger, Westport, Conn., 1999.
3. Public Involvement Techniques for Transportation Decisionmaking. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1996.
4. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation. Public Involvement. 2010. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/pubinv2.htm. Accessed Nov. 14, 2014.
5. U.S. Department of Transportation. Statewide Transportation Planning; Metropolitan Transportation Planning. Final rule. 23 CFR, Parts 450 and 500, 2007. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007-02-14/html/07-493.htm. Accessed Nov. 14, 2014.
6. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation. Transportation Project Development and NEPA: Interim Policy on Public Involvement. http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/tdmpi_p_d.asp. Accessed 31 July 2014.
7. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation. Planning Public Involvement and Its Role in Project Development. 2003. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/public_involvement/project_development/. Accessed July 31 and Nov. 15, 2014.
8. Oliver S., Rees R., Clarke-Jones L., Milne R., Oakley A., Gabbay J., Stein K., Buchanan P., and Gyte G. A Multidimensional Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Public Involvement in Health Services Research. Health Expectations, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2008, pp. 72–84.
9. Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making (Dietz T., and Stern P. C., eds.). Panel on Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2008.
10. O'Connor R., Schwartz M., Schaad J., and Boyd D. State of the Practice: White Paper on Public Involvement. Transportation in the New Millennium, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/millennium/00108.pdf. Accessed Nov. 14, 2014.
11. Rowe G., and Frewer L. Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation. Science, Technology, and Human Values, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2000, pp. 3–30.
12. Rowe G., and Frewer L. Evaluating Public Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda. Science, Technology, and Human Values, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2004, pp. 512–556.
13. Konisky D., and Beierle T. Innovations in Public Participation and Environmental Decision Making: Examples from the Great Lakes Region. Society and Natural Resources, Vol. 14, No. 9, 2001, pp. 815–826.
14. Mennecke B., and Crossland M. Geographic Information Systems: Applications and Research Opportunities for Information Systems Researchers. Proc., 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Vol. 3, 1996, pp. 537–546.
15. Abelson J., Pierre-Gerlier F., Smith P., Martin E., and Francois-Pierre G. Deliberations About Deliberative Methods: Issues in the Design and Evaluation of Public Participation Processes. Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 57, 2003, pp. 239–251.
16. Mullen P. Public Involvement in Health Care Priority Setting: An Overview of Methods for Eliciting Values. Health Expectations, Vol. 2, 1999, pp. 222–234.
17. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. Shared Vision Planning. 2009. http://www.sharedvisionplanning.us/. Accessed July 31, 2014.
18. Open Government Directive. The White House. 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/memoranda_2010/m10-06.pdf. Accessed July 31, 2014.
19. Champions of Participation. Full Report of Proceedings. 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/files/documents/ostp/opengov_inbox/champions-report-of-proceedings-final.pdf. Accessed July 28, 2014.
20. Grossardt T., Bailey K., and Brumm J. Structured Public Involvement: Problems and Prospects for Improvement. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1858, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 95–102.
21. Bailey K., and Grossardt T. Towards Structured Public Involvement: Justice, Geography and Collaborative Geospatial/Geovisual Decision Support Systems. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 100, No. 1, 2010, pp. 57–86.
22. Arnstein S. The Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the Institute of American Planners, Vol. 35, No. 4, 1969, pp. 216–224.
23. Bailey K., and Grossardt T. Addressing the Arnstein Gap: Improving Public Confidence in Transportation Planning and Design through Structured Public Involvement (SPI). Proc., 11th International GeoMultimedia Symposium (M. Schrenk, ed.), Vienna, Austria, Vol. 11, CORP2006, 2006, pp. 337–341.
24. Arizona Indymedia. Opposition Grows to the I-10 Bypass. Dec. 10, 2007. http://arizona.indymedia.org/news/2007/12/70994.php. Accessed Nov. 14, 2014.
25. LA Transportation Plan Delayed After Public Protest. Peoplesworld.org. http://peoplesworld.org/la-transportation-plan-delayed-after-public-protest/. Accessed Nov. 14, 2014.
26. Grossardt T., and Bailey K. Justice and the Public's Involvement in Infrastructure Planning: An Analysis and Proposal. Practicing Planner, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2007. Abstract. http://www.planning.org/practicingplanner/2007/spr.
27. Bailey K., Grossardt T., Blandford B., and Ripy J. Planning, Technology and Legitimacy. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2011, pp. 447–467.
28. Jewell W., Gill R., Grossardt T., and Bailey K. A New Method for Public Involvement in Electric Power Transmission Line Routing. Transactions of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Power Delivery, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2009, pp. 2240–2247.
29. Grossardt T., Bailey K., Ripy J., and Blandford B. Use of Structured Public Involvement for Identifying Community Preferences for a Superfund Site End State Vision. Proc., World Environmental and Water Resources Congress, Providence, R.I., ASCE, Reston, Va., 2010, pp. 370–380.
30. Szyliowitz J. Measuring the Effectiveness of Public Involvement Approaches. TR News, No. 220, May–June 2002, pp. 35–38.
31. Assessing the Effectiveness of Project-Based Public Involvement Processes: A Self-Assessment Tool for Practitioners. Transportation Research Board Committee on Public Involvement in Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1999. http://ncdd.org/rc/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/AssessingPublicInvolvement.pdf.
32. Executive Summary: Public Involvement Evaluation Report. Pima Association of Governments, Tucson, Ariz., 2005.
33. Florida Department of Transportation. Performance Measures to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Public Involvement Activities in Florida. Tallahassee, 2008. http://www.cutr.usf.edu/pdf/PIPM%20Final%20Report%206-26.pdf. Accessed July 31, 2014.
34. Connelly S. Looking Inside Public Involvement: How Is It Made So Ineffective and Can We Change This? Community Development Journal, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2005, pp. 13–24.
35. Checkland R. Soft Systems in Action. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1990.
36. Beierle T., and Cayford J. Democracy in Practice: Public Participation in Environmental Decisions. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., 2002.
37. Bingham L., Nabatchi T., and O'Leary R. The New Governance: Practices and Processes for Stakeholder and Citizen Participation in the Work of Government. Public Administration Review, Vol. 65, No. 5, 2006, pp. 528–539.
38. Kubicek H., Lippa B., and Koop A. Erfolgreich Beteiligt? Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh, Germany, 2010.
39. Abelson J., Pierre-Gerlier F., Smith P., Martin E., Gauvin F.-P. Deliberations About Deliberative Methods: Issues in the Design and Evaluation of Public Participation Processes. Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 57, 2003, pp. 239–251.
40. Barnes G., and Langworthy P. Understanding and Managing Conflict in Transportation Project Public Involvement. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1895, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 102–107.
41. Conflict Resolution. Udall Foundation, Tucson, Ariz., 2011.
42. Addressing the Citizenship and Democratic Deficits: Exploring the Potential of Deliberative Democracy for Public Administration. American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 376–399.
43. Nyerges T., Ramsey K., and Wilson M. Design Considerations for an Internet Portal to Support Public Participation in Transportation Improvement Decision Making. In Collaborative Geographic Information Systems (Balram S., and Dragicevic S., eds.), Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, Pa., 2006, pp. 207–235.
44. Zietsman J., Ramani T., Potter J., Reeder V., and DeFlorio J. NCHRP Report 708: A Guidebook for Sustainability Performance Measurements for Transportation Agencies. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2011.
45. Bailey K. Public Involvement in Arizona's Transportation Decision Making. In From Here to There: Transportation Opportunities for Arizona. 94th Arizona Town Hall. 2009, pp. 175–182. http://www.aztownhall.org/94. Accessed July 31, 2014.
46. Reinhard Mohn Prize Awarded to Brazilian Citizen Participation Project. Bertelsmann Foundation. 2011. Gutersloh, Germany. https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/presse-startpunkt/press/press-releases/press-release/pid/reinhard-mohn-prize-awarded-to-brazilian-citizen-participation-project/.
47. Bailey K., and Grossardt T. H. Structured Public Involvement in Context-Sensitive Noise Wall Design Using Casewise Visual Evaluation. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1984, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006, pp. 112–120.
48. Bailey K., Grossardt T. H., Ripy J., Toole L., Williams J. B., and Dietrick J. Structured Public Involvement in Context-Sensitive Large Bridge Design Using Casewise Visual Evaluation: Case Study of Section 2 of Ohio River Bridges Project. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2028, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 19–27.
49. Blandford B. L., Grossardt T., Ripy J., and Bailey K. Integrated Transportation and Land Use Scenario Modeling by Visual Evaluation of Examples: Case Study of Jeffersonville, Indiana. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2076, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 192–208.
50. Bailey K., Brumm J., and Grossardt T. Towards Structured Public Involvement in Highway Design: A Comparative Study of Visualization Methods and Preference Modeling Using CAVE (Casewise Visual Evaluation). Journal of Geographic Information and Decision Analysis, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2001, pp. 1–15.
51. Grossardt T., Bailey K., and Brumm J. Analytic Minimum Impedance Surface: Geographic Information System-Based Corridor Planning Methodology. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1768, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 224–232.
52. Ormsbee L., and Hoover A. End State Vision Process for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Proc., World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2010, Providence, R.I., ASCE, Reston, Va., 2010.
53. Michael Baker Associates. Preference Polling on the Louisville Bridge. Signature, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2007, pp. 16–21.
54. Rydin Y. Conflict, Consensus and Rationality in Environmental Planning: An Institutional Discourse Approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2003.
55. Krek A. Rational Ignorance of the Citizens in Participatory Planning. Proc., 10th International GeoMultimedia Symposium (M. Schrenk, ed.), Vol. 10, CORP2005, Vienna, Austria, 2005, pp. 165–169.
56. Comeau P. S., and Rodriquez D.A. Picking Publics Properly: An Artful Science. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1706, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 92–99.
57. Transportation Research Board Committee on Public Involvement. Getting People on Board. 1998.
58. Battelle. An Evaluation of DOE-EM Public Participation Programs. 2003. http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-14200.pdf. Accessed Nov. 14, 2014.
59. Duthie J., Cervenka K., and Waller S. T. Environmental Justice Analysis: Challenges for Metropolitan Transportation Planning. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2013, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 8–12.
60. Whitmore W., Cook E., and Steiner F. Public Involvement in Visual Assessment: Verde River Corridor Study. Landscape Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1995, pp. 26–45.
61. Steinitz C. Toward a Sustainable Landscape with High Visual Preference and High Ecological Integrity. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 19, 1990. pp. 113–150.
62. Bingham L., Nabatchi T., and O'Leary R. The New Governance: Practices and Processes for Stakeholder and Citizen Participation in the Work of Government. Public Administration Review, Vol. 65, No. 5, 2005, pp. 528–539.
63. Dietrick J. C., Williams J. B., Toole L., and Grossardt T. Preference Polling on Downtown Louisville Ohio River Crossing: Structured Public Involvement from Designer's Standpoint. Presented at 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2008.
64. Stamatiadis N., Kirk A. J., Hartman D., Hopwood T. II, and Pigman J. G. NCHRP Report 642: Quantifying the Benefits of Context-Sensitive Solutions. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_642.pdf. Accessed July 31, 2014.
65. Levitt R. E., Henisz W., Scott W. R., Settel D. Governance Challenges of Infrastructure Delivery: The Case for Socio-Economic Governance Approaches. Proc., 2010 Construction Research Congress: Innovation for Reshaping Construction Practice, Banff, Alberta, Canada, ASCE, Reston, Va., 2010, pp. 757–767.
66. Forkenbrock D. J., and Sheeley J. NCHRP Report 532: Effective Methods for Environmental Justice Assessment. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004.
67. Dilley M., and Gallaher T. Building a Bridge to the Public: The Alaska Experience. Public Roads, Vol. 62, No. 2, 1998, pp. 10–19.
68. Public Involvement Handbook: Techniques, Strategies and Organization for Public Involvement. Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, 1998.
69. Few R. 2001. Containment and Counter-Containment: Planner/Community Relations in Conservation Planning. Geographical Journal, Vol. 167, No. 2, pp. 111–124.
70. Jackson L. Contemporary Public Involvement: Toward a Strategic Approach. Local Environment, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2001, pp. 135–147.
71. Transportation Research Circular E-C067: Context-Sensitive Design Around the Country: Some Examples. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004.
72. Hoover J. How to Build Community Support for Transit. Mass Transit, Vol. 24, No. 5, 1998, pp. 32–37.
73. Gottemoeller F., Kempf F., and Long J. R. Empowered Public Participation in the Design of the Turtle Creek Viaduct, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Presented at 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2008.
74. Kyem P. Of Intractable Conflicts and Participatory GIS Applications: The Search for Consensus Amidst Competing Claims and Institutional Demands. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 94, No. 1, 2004, pp. 37–57.
75. Gauvreau P. The Three Myths of Bridge Aesthetics. In Developments in Short and Medium Span Bridge Engineering (Brett P. H., Banthia N., and Buckland P. G., eds.), Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2002, pp. 49–56.
76. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1971.
77. Bailey K., Grossardt T., and Ripy J. Toward Environmental Justice in Transportation Decision Making with Structured Public Involvement. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2320, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 102–110.
78. Keeney R., Von Winterfeldt D., and Eppel T. Eliciting Public Values for Complex Policy Decisions. Journal of Management Science, Vol. 36, No. 9, 1990, pp. 1011–1030.
79. Bell D. Environmental Justice and Rawls’ Difference Principle. Environmental Ethics, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2004, pp. 287–306.
80. Tison J., Chaudhary N., and Cosgrove L. National Phone Survey on Distracted Driving Attitudes and Behaviors. Report DOT HS 811 555. NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2011.
81. Hartell A. M. Methodological Challenges of Environmental Justice Assessments for Transportation Projects. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2013, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 21–29.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: April 28, 2019
Issue published: January 2015
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 84
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 5
- Approaching accessibility: Four opportunities to address the needs of ...
- Participation in planning and governance: closing the gap between sati...
- The View From the Top of Arnstein’s Ladder
- Achieving Transportation Equity: Meaningful Public Involvement to Meet...
- References
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
