|
Planning Portal Forum, in association with Communities and Local Government
Method(s) Used
Name of person who posted the project: Kerry Ryan
Location of project: United Kingdom
Date when the project started: 2007
Date when the project ended/project ongoing: 2007
Background to project: The Planning Portal is the UK government�s online planning and regulation resource. Oversight is provided by Communities and Local Government.
Purpose of project: The Planning Portal recently developed a specific product (the 1APP, National Standard Planning Application Form) and invited local planning authorities (LPAs) to take part in a consultation about its implementation.
The forum was set up to feed into the consultation about IAPP. Its specific objectives were to:
- Identify and share best practice solutions for e-planning in local authorities;
- Inform Planning Portal product development and service improvement;
- Support and encourage take-up of LPA e-planning services;
- Allow LPAs to follow up courses and events with peers and Planning Portal representatives
Project activities: Online deliberative forum.
The forum was established for a core stakeholder base � the 410 local planning authorities in England and Wales. Those wishing to read or contribute to the forum required a gov.uk email address to register.
The forum was pre-moderated by Planning Portal staff. Representatives from the consultation team logged-in to promote deliberation and respond to queries.
A number of discrete themes were opened up for discussion and feedback. Some were broad; others more detailed:
- National Register Feasibility study;
- Take-up;
- LPA forum events 2007;
- Storing PDFs in Idox document management systems;
- IAPP, The National Standard Planning Application Form;
- Adobe measurement tool;
- Open Suggestions.
Project results: Strengths
- The online consultation had a clarity of purpose and a defined user base;
- The forum provided a dedicated �safe space� to discuss policy in open, transparent terms;
- Moderators were responsive to user input;
- Background information was made available in a resources section;
- The rate of registrations was high;
- The rate of posts retained a consistency.
Potential for improvement
- The participation rate was low when compared to stated user interest;
- The community had limited time to coalesce and build momentum;
- The forum used a pre-moderation strategy, which slowed the dialogue amongst a known stakeholder group;
- The exercise would have benefited from involvement of policy leads who had the knowledge to be able to respond on specifics about policy (in support of moderators);
- A greater range of means by which users could respond to consultation would have accommodated different levels of expertise and tastes.
Contact details: www.planningportalforum.net
Source:Digital Dialogues Second Phase report - Hansard Society/Ministry of Justice 2007
eDemocracy Programme,
Hansard Society,
40-43 Chancery Lane
London WC2A 1JA
e - edemocracy@hansard.lse.ac.uk
t - 020 7438 1222
|
Recommended Case Studies
|