Are English neighbourhood forums democratically legitimate?
Are English neighbourhood forums democratically legitimate?
复制标题
英国邻里论坛在民主上合法吗？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Paul Cowie
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Davoudi;Paul Cowie
英国联合政府倡导地方主义，认为它为大社会奠定基础并加强地方民主（DCLG，2010）。在这篇评论中，我们提出了一些问题，这一主张的有效性和民主合法性的邻里论坛的部分借鉴的调查结果，从案例研究的北希尔兹鱼码头（NSFQ）邻里计划。2011年《地方主义法》赋予英格兰地方“社区”制定邻里规划的新权利。这样做的政治权力被分配给两个不同的机构：教区委员会和邻里论坛。虽然教区理事会长期以来一直是民选政府系统的一部分（参与规划的最低一级），但国家基金会是全新的规划机构，在当地没有教区理事会的地方，至少可以由21个自我选择的地方“利益攸关方”建立。一方面，地方主义的言论将2011年的规划系统改革，特别是街区规划描绘为“有利于地方社区”的举措（社区和地方政府部[DCLG]，2011年，第15页），并将其描绘为使规划“更加民主和更加有效”的一种方式（DCLG，2011年，第6页）。另一方面，国家阵线的建立可以被视为偏离民主规划进程，因为国家阵线的成员不是选举产生的，也不正式代表其选区。但是，他们非正式地代表他们吗？我们处理这一问题的方法是借鉴对代表性的多元理解，这种理解超出了定期投票的范围。
Localism is advocated by the UK Coalition Government as laying the foundation for the Big Society and strengthening local democracy (DCLG, 2010). In this commentary we raise a number of questions about the validity of this claim and the democratic legitimacy of neighbourhood forums by drawing partly on the findings from a case study of North Shields Fish Quay (NSFQ) Neighbourhood Plan. The Localism Act, 2011 has given local “communities” in England a new right to draw up neighbourhood plans (NPs). The political authority for doing so is assigned to two different bodies: parish councils and neighbourhood forums (NF). While parish councils have been part of the elected government system (the lowest tier engaged in planning) for a long time, NFs are entirely new planning institutions that can be established by a minimum of 21 self-selected local “stakeholders” where no parish council exists in the locality. On the one hand, the rhetoric of localism portrays the 2011 reform of the planning system and neighbourhood planning in particular as a move in “favour of local communities” (Department of Communities and Local Government [DCLG], 2011, p. 15) and as a way of making planning “more democratic and more effective” (DCLG, 2011, p. 6). On the other hand, the creation of NFs can be seen as a departure from democratic planning processes on the grounds that members of the NFs are not elected and do not formally represent their constituency. But, do they informally represent them? We address this question by drawing on a pluralist understanding of representation which extends beyond periodic elections at the ballot box.