Democratic Assessment of Collaborative Planning Practices

Abstract

Collaborative planning has long emphasised communication and interaction, yet its evaluation has received limited attention. Existing assessment frameworks often overlook democratic values that are central to urban democracy. Building on Agger and Loefgren’s “Democratic Assessment Framework,” this study develops a comprehensive set of criteria to assess how different phases of collaboration—input, process, and outcome—align with democratic norms. Applied to various decision-making and consultation cases, the framework proves effective in identifying successes and failures and clarifying their causes. The study further proposes qualitative criteria to contextualise evaluations, offering deeper insight into the democratic quality of collaborative planning practices.