Skip Navigation



Community Development Journal Advance Access published online on February 25, 2005
Community Development Journal, doi:10.1093/cdj/bsi046
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
41/1/13    most recent
bsi046v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Connelly, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press and Community Development Journal. 2005 All rights reserved

Article

Looking inside public involvement: how is it made so ineffective and can we change this?

Stephen Connelly 1*

1 Department of Town and Regional Planning, University of Sheffield, UK

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Stephen Connelly, E-mail: S.Connelly{at}sheffield.ac.uk


  Abstract

Communities and community groups across Britain are faced with ever-increasing opportunities to ‘participate’, yet such engagement is widely viewed as ineffective and the motives behind it viewed with suspicion. This article suggests that ineffectiveness is often at least partly the result of decisions that are taken within the wider policy-making processes that develop and surround public involvement, and presents a way of analysing such management. This analysis also points to a strategy for being more effective, through attempting to become more active players in the larger policy-making ‘game’.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 COMMUNITY DEV JHome page
D. Clover
Feminist aesthetic practice of community development: the case of Myths and Mirrors Community Arts
Community Dev. J., October 1, 2007; 42(4): 512 - 522.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.