Skip navigation

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
Act on it (Forum Theatre)
GM Nation
Taking it on (Online Consultation)
The Walsall Participatory Appraisal Network
Udecide Newcastle
Your Health Your Care Your Say