DELTA: Promoting Young People Participation in Urban Planning

  • Mikael Reiersølmoen
  • Francesco GianniEmail author
  • Monica Divitini
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 80)


Today urban areas are growing fast, in this process it remains a challenge to include the opinions of the public. This holds especially true for young people. From the 1960’s, the rights of the children started to be recognized through the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Article 12 of the convention states that children should have the opportunity to express their views in matters that affect them, like urban planning. Our work started analysing the literature and providing an overview of participatory methods used to include children in land-use projects. We then reviewed existing mobile apps targeting participation in public life. Based on the findings from the literature a list of high level requirements was created to guide the design and implementation of the mobile app DELTA. The DELTA app support situated participation encouraging users to explore the urban environment, promoting awareness and critical thinking. Several user evaluations are performed during the development cycles, including expert evaluations, usability and field tests of the final prototype. Based on collected data and lessons learned, results are discussed in relation to participation and learning outcomes for children.


Mobile technology Participation Urban planning 


  1. Allen M, Regenbrecht H, Abbott M (2011) Smart-Phone Augmented Reality for Public Participation in Urban Planning, pp 11–20Google Scholar
  2. Bartlett S (2002) Building Better Cities with Children and YouthGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohøj M, Borchorst NG, Bødker S, Korn M, Zander, P-O (2011) Public deliberation in municipal planning: supporting action and reflection with mobile technology. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on communities and technologies, pp 88–97. ACMGoogle Scholar
  4. Breitbart MM (1995) Banners for the street: reclaiming space and designing change with urban youth. J Plann Educ Res 15(1):35–49MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Castells M, Fernandez-Ardevol M, LinchuanQiu J, Sey A (2009) Mobile Communication and Society: A Global Perspective. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Chawla L, Heft H (2002) Children’s competence and the ecology of communities: a functional approach to the evaluation of participation. J Environ. Psychol. 22(1–2):201–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark BY, Brudney JL, Jang S-G (2013) Coproduction of government services and the new information technology: investigating the distributional biases. Public Adm Rev 73(5):687–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Corsi M (2002) The child friendly cities initiative in Italy. Environ Urbanization 14(2):169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cunningham CJ, Jones MA, Dillon R (2003) Children and urban regional planning: participation in the public consultation process through story writing. Children’s Geographies 1(2):201–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dennis SF (2006) Prospects for qualitative GIS at the intersection of youth development and participatory urban planning. Environ Plan A 38(11):2039–2054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Francis M (1988) Negotiating between children and adult design values in open space projects. Des Stud 9(2):67–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frank KI (2006) The potential of youth participation in planning. J Plan Lit 20(4):351–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gleeson B, Sipe N (2006) Creating Child Friendly Cities: New Perspectives and Prospects. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Gordon E, Schirra S, Hollander J (2011) Immersive planning: a conceptual model for designing public participation with new technologies. Environ Plan B Plan Des 38(3):505–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haider J (2007) Inclusive design: planning public urban spaces for children. In: Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers-municipal engineer, pp 160:83–88. Thomas Telford LtdGoogle Scholar
  16. Halprin L, Hester Jr RT, Mullen D (1999) Lawrence Halprin [Interview]. Places 12 (2)Google Scholar
  17. Hart, RA (1992) Children’s Participation: From Tokenism to Citizenship, vol 4. Innocenti Essays. ERICGoogle Scholar
  18. Hirsch AB (2011) Scoring the participatory city: lawrence (& Anna) halprin’s take part process. J Architectural Educ 64(2):127–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Horelli L (1997) A methodological approach to children’s participation in urban planning. Scand Hous Plan Res 14(3):105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Innes JE, Booher DE (2004) Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Plan Theory Pract 5(4):419–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Irvin RA, Stansbury J (2004) Citizen participation in decision making: is it worth the effort? Public Adm Rev 64(1):55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kangas A, Rasinmäki J, Eyvindson K, Chambers P (2015) A mobile phone application for the collection of opinion data for forest planning purposes. Environ Manage 55(4):961–971. doi: 10.1007/s00267-014-0438-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keele S (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. In: Technical Report, Ver. 2.3, EBSE Technical Report. EBSE.snGoogle Scholar
  24. Korn M (2013) Situating Engagement: Ubiquitous Infrastructures for in-Situ Civic Engagement. Ph.D. thesis, Aarhus UniversitetAarhus University, Science and TechnologyScience and Technology, Institut for Datalogi Department of Computer ScienceGoogle Scholar
  25. Lansdown, G (2010) The realisation of children’s participation rights: critical reflections. In: A handbook of children and young people’s participation: perspectives from theory and practiceGoogle Scholar
  26. Laughlin DL, Johnson LC (2011) Defining and exploring public space: perspectives of young people from regent park, Toronto. Children’s Geographies 9(3–4):439–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lehner U, Reitberger, W, Baldauf M, Fröhlich P, Eranti V (2014) Civic engagement meets pervasive gaming: towards long-term mobile participation. pp 1483–1488. doi: 10.1145/2559206.2581270
  28. Mallan K, Greenaway R (2011) Radiant with possibility: involving young people in creating a vision for the future of their community. Futures 43(4):374–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Malone K (2013) The future lies in our hands’: children as researchers and environmental change agents in designing a child-friendly neighbourhood. Local Environ 18(3):372–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Norwegian Government (2008) Planning and Building Act, JuneGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Hara, K (2008) Understanding geocaching practices and motivations. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 1177–1186. ACMGoogle Scholar
  32. Oksman V, Väätänen A, Ylikauppila M (2014) Co-creation of sustainable smart cities: users, participation and service design. pp 189–95Google Scholar
  33. Passon C, Levi D, del Rio V (2008) Implications of adolescents’ perceptions and values for planning and design. J Plan Educ ResGoogle Scholar
  34. Reiersølmoen M (2016) Facilitating children and youth’s participation in urban planningGoogle Scholar
  35. Roberts N (2004) Public deliberation in an age of direct citizen participation. Am Rev Public Adm 34(4):315–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schröder C (2014) A mobile app for citizen participation. November 2014, pp 75–78. doi: 10.1145/2729104.2729137
  37. Spier, JJ (2013) A walk in the park: an experiential approach to youth participation. Youth Studies Australia 32 (3)Google Scholar
  38. Torres J (2012) Participation as a pedagogy of complexity: lessons from two design projects with children. Urban Des Int 17(1):62–75MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tullis TS, Jacqueline NS (2004) A comparison of questionnaires for assessing website usability. In: Usability Professional Association Conference, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  40. Wilks J, Rudner J (2013) A Voice for Children and Young People in the City. Aust J Environ Educ 29(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikael Reiersølmoen
    • 1
  • Francesco Gianni
    • 1
    Email author
  • Monica Divitini
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations