Urban planners’ perspectives of public participation in planning in Nigeria

Public/community participation is globally recognized today as an integral aspect of urban planning. This is evident in various international, national, and local planning standards, regulations, and policies. This is no different in Nigeria where the various national and state level planning regulations incorporate this integral part of planning. This study investigates the extent of public participation in planning in Rivers State, Nigeria. Urban planners working in Rivers State were interviewed and academic papers on public participation in planning reviewed. This work finds that despite the mandatory legal provision for public inclusion in the planning process, it is largely not implemented in practice in the formal planning process. The lack of public participation in the planning process is a major reason for poor public support of plans which impacts successful execution. For Nigeria to achieve goals of having sustainable and vibrant urban communities, it is essential to begin implementing the planning laws which mandates public participation by meaningfully involving the public in urban planning processes. This will ensure a broader acceptance and instil a feeling of ownership of plans and processes among citizens which will enhance sustainable planning and development.


Introduction
The need for public participation in urban planning has gained wide traction, recognition, and acceptance as an integral component of the planning process. Just as land-use decisions made in the past affect the quality of today's urban environment, decisions made today will shape the quality of urban life for current and future generations. In every part of the world, the urban planning system is strongly shaped and influenced by the context within which it operates. Many previously colonized countries, particularly those of the global South, have formal planning systems predominantly modeled from the colonizing countries (Echendu 2022. These adopted planning systems are inserted into unique local institutional contexts. However, their ability to shape land management in cities and towns is delimited by a wide array of international, national, and local forces. Examination of the futurity of urban planning needs to occur within the local context and consider the factors which impact the socio-spatial side of cities and the institutional systems primarily tasked with managing them (Watson 2009). Planning in Nigeria has suffered from a lack of coordination and harmonization of programs and policies both within the tenure of an administration and those succeeding it (Ibietan and Ekhosuehi 2013). The planning culture and the decision-making context determines the level of public involvement in the planning process (Lane 2005). This means that public participation can only be measured, evaluated, or understood within the specific decisionmaking environment in which it is situated. Over the years, a paradigm shift has emerged in urban planning whereby the need for public participation is increasingly being accepted. Mechanisms for this are usually put in place in the form of legislation and policies. Public participation is recognized as a catalyst for effective policy implementation (Efobi and Anierobi 2013) by virtue of it being an integral aspect and element of sustainable development. This has been chronicled in various international policy documents like Agenda 21, the Brundtland Report, the Sustainable Development Goals, and the New Urban Agenda.
The hegemonic view in Nigeria is that current approaches to urban planning and management do not promote or encourage citizen participation (Etemire 2020. This is despite the provisions for public participation in the overarching national environmental planning legislation. Previous studies have investigated the extent of participation of citizens in urban planning and have found it deficient (Badiora and Ojo 2021;Dung-Gwom 2011;Gyau 2018). This study explores the extent of involvement of citizens in the planning process by engaging with urban planners. As urban planners are at the coal face of implementing planning regulations, the aim is to ascertain the extent of citizen participation in their work. Here, the focus is on citizen participation in government urban planning decision-making processes in Nigeria. This paper also explores the reasons for poor public support for urban plans and public participation in urban planning from the perspective of planners. No known research is known to have explored public participation in urban planning with urban planners in Nigeria, a gap this work fills. Community participation and public participation are used in this paper as synonyms.

Research method
The research sought to understand the extent of compliance with the planning regulations that mandate public involvement in the Nigerian planning system. It is a qualitative study that was investigated via semi-structured interviews conducted with five urban planners working in the city of Port Harcourt and a review of the literature on public participation in Nigeria. The respondents have all worked in various senior and mid-level roles in Rivers State for more than 10 years. They were all male reflecting the male dominated nature of the town planning professions in Nigeria. Recruitment was via snowballing with an urban planner in the researcher's network making the initial referrals. This recruitment method was ideal in the circumstance and helped maintain a trusting and cordial interview environment given that they have been introduced via a mutual acquaintance. Interview questions touched upon public involvement in planning, the reasons for non-acceptance of urban plans and how the planning practice can be revitalized to encourage public participation. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and then coded to draw meaning and identify themes. The respondents are not identified with their real names in this research to protect their identity.

Country planning context
Nigeria is a former British Colony that gained independence in 1960. It now boasts a population of over 208 million (Echendu and Georgeou 2021). The country is deemed the giant of Africa because it is the most populous and largest economy in Africa (Echendu 2020a). Its population is expected to continue to grow. By 2050, it will be one of three countries(including India and China) projected to make up 30% up of the global population and become the third most populous country (Abubakar and Aina 2019;Offorha et al. 2020). More than half of this population will be concentrated in urban communities. This makes it needful to pay closer attention to the planning of urban spaces in the country. Nigeria currently operates a federal system of governance. It is made up of 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory.
Formal land administration and urban planning practices were introduced in the country during the colonial era. However, effective traditional land management practices were in place among the different ethnic groups that make up the country before the colonial incursion and still remain in place (Hull 1976;Aliyu 2017). The successive post-colonial administrations remain rooted in the original colonial planning and land administration provisions (Echendu 2019). The 1992 Urban and Regional Planning Act is the planning legislation currently in place (Awuah 2018;Omole and Akinbamijo 2012).
The Master Planning approach is favored in Nigeria. This planning style is rooted in the conventional procedural model which is a highly technical and analytic form of planning. A comprehensive urban Master Plan is designed using text and map to depict the proposed future land-use and infrastructure model for an area for a stipulated period (Okpala 2009). Some Nigerian states have Master Plans that are supposed to guide urban development to achieve the state's vision of its urban environment.
Nigeria practices federalism, a system of governance characterized by the division of power among the federal, state, and local governments. In reality, the federal government wields the most power (Adama 2018;Echendu 2022;Ogunyankin 2014). By the provisions of the 1992 Urban and Regional Planning Act, the country ought to have one National Planning Commission, 36 state urban planning Boards, and 774 Local Planning Authorities (Daramola and Olowoporoku 2017;Lekwot et al. 2013). However, this is yet to be achieved. Since the enactment of the 1992 planning law, there is still no national planning framework in place even though the law mandates this (Echendu 2022: Lamond 2015. Part 1, Sections 13-26 of the Nigerian Urban and Regional Planning (NURP) Decree No. 88 of 1992 recognizes and outlines the requirements for public participation in planning. Public suggestions, comments, and objections are to be considered in preparing the "Draft National Physical Development Plan". These inputs are to be studied and approved by the relevant body to produce the "Operative National Development Plan". In the aforementioned parts of the national planning law, the procedure for the preparation of national physical development plans is also detailed. The planning commission is mandated to call for submissions from all relevant publics (government organizations, non-governmental organizations, and citizens) whose contribution will serve as part of the input towards the preparation of a draft plan. The draft plans will then be exhibited publicly. Members of the public, professional bodies, government, and non-governmental organizations can during this exhibition period, submit to the commission a written statement of their objections to any aspect of the plan. The statement must highlight the nature and reason for the objections and suggest what alterations and amendments are to be made to ensure the satisfaction of the objector. The commission is mandated to acknowledge any receipt of objection in writing. This provision highlights the recognition accorded public participation in the national planning regulation. The place of public participation is further strengthened in the Nigeria Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Decree No. 86, 1992 which states that the relevant overseeing agency must provide government agencies, the public, and relevant agencies the opportunity to participate during the EIA process (Adomokai and Sheate 2004). While the local government by law have a role in urban governance, in reality, their involvement in urban planning ranges from marginal to zero. Their constitutional roles and obligations in other spheres of governance is also stripped in practice. The usurpation of their role by mainly the state seems to have been accepted as the norm (Adama 2018). The current system meant to share power at the three levels of government is a farce as the most power remains vested in the center.

State context
Rivers State is a key state in Nigeria's economic discourse due to it being a major oil-producing state given that oil drives Nigeria's economy (Echendu 2020b). It is a coastal city that lies in the heart of the Niger Delta Region. Urban planning in the state is currently regulated by the Physical Planning Act of 2003 and the Greater Port-Harcourt City Development Authority (GPHCDA) Law No. 2 of 2009. The urban development framework (UDF) is the strategic planning policy document central to the GPHCDA planning work and activities (Echendu 2021). The physical environment of Port Harcourt has significantly declined leading the city to be labeled the 'garbage city', 'the tattered city', etc., in lieu of its original reputation as 'the garden city' (Bodo 2019;Sotonye 2019). Decades ago, Aprioku (1998) observed that the urban planning environment in Rivers state is characterized by a disconnect between plan and implementation. The planning system has not changed much years down the line with the urban space deteriorating further (Baadom et al. 2015;Kio-Lawson and Dekor 2014). The state government in a bid to revamp the city conceived a new vision to transform the city into a world class city known as the Greater Port Harcourt city (http:// www. gph-city. com/). This new city is envisioned to cater to the city's growing population, provide modern urban amenities, cater to the housing needs, etc.
The 2008 Greater Port Harcourt city Master Plan was the guide to achieve this vision. It was prepared by Arcus Gibbs, a foreign consultancy firm and adopted a rationalist top-down planning approach (Wenike and Dawaye 2021). However, the plan has been critiqued for lack of public involvement in the plan preparation process and has not been made public (Amnesty 2010). This is despite the requirement for public participation in the preparation of draft urban plans in the Rivers State planning laws as stipulated in Parts one and two of the planning law.
The extant 2008 Master Plan succeeds that of 1975. The plan aims to create the best environment to facilitate prosperity for citizens, good physical environment for residents at work, home, and leisure, providing and encouraging the provision of premium cultural, social and recreational facilities, and facilitating the most efficient and economical operation of the composite systems. Similar goals were also a prominent feature in the city redevelopment plan of 1973 which did not incorporate any form of public participation and was also designed by a foreign firm (Aprioku 1998). While public involvement is required by law, the reality is different.

Public participation in planning in Nigeria
The importance of public participation in the urban planning practice is increasingly being recognized leading to growing calls for participatory planning (Adjei Mensah et al. 2017Swapan 2016, #87). A shift from the rationalist approach to planning whereby a few technocrats, government officials, or experts controlled the decision-making process to a more inclusive and participatory approach involving the local people and a wide range of stakeholders is also happening (Adjei Mensah et al. 2017). This form of participatory planning takes the form of planning with the people instead of planning for the people.
Agenda 21, a product of the 1992 United Nations conference on the environment and development emphasizes the importance of the active participation of community members in planning. This is because it allows the local planning authorities to formulate grounded policies that incorporate and reflect the opinions of locals while also addressing relevant economic, social, and environmental issues effectively. The Brundtland report, on its part, also recognizes the need for community participation in achieving sustainable development, and emphasizes that urban planning has a critical role to play as development is mediated via the physical and built environments (Echendu 2020b). The report reiterates that recognition must be given to local communities who must have a decisive voice on issues concerning them (Brundtland 1987, pp. 115-116).
The sustainable development goals (SDGs) also recognize the importance of citizen participation in policymaking within the urban sphere. Target 11.3 of SDG11 specifically aims to improve inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries by 2030. The New Urban Agenda (HABITAT 2016) also reaffirmed all the principles of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and calls for the enabling, engagement and participation of communities in the planning and implementation of policies.
Public participation is essential for representative and fair decision-making in the planning process. It helps in framing land-use plans in a manner that addresses the various problems, needs, and interests of citizens for a positive outcome. Planning authorities can utilize public participation and engagement opportunities to obtain crucial information as well as acquire useful experiences on what problems can best be solved by community members themselves while democratizing the planning process at the same time (Adjei Mensah et al. 2017).It is a useful avenue to educate, integrate and bridge the gap between the public perception of how the environment ought to be modeled and expert professional knowledge (Oloyede et al. 2010). Regardless, it has also been labeled an ambiguous term with unclear yet positive overtones (Lahiri-Dutt 2004). Generally, it involves members of the public and government representatives interacting during the planning process to enable citizens have a voice in decisions that impact them. Individual citizens, associations, and organizations who have an interest in planning activities can participate in the various consultation stages as mandated or provided for by relevant legislation. Citizens have a crucial role to play in shaping the urban environment and in formulating planning visions, negotiating issues, and creating structures that enable better social relations and the advancement of shared interests and consensus (Ogbazi 2013).
The notion of public participation in planning has evolved considerably with time. There is now a plethora of techniques and methods that can be deployed to enhance participation for example, workshops, public hearings, public exhibitions with mechanisms for feedback and discussions, and focus group discussions. Community involvement and participation are deemed important for representative and fair decision-making in present-day planning practice (Mahjabeen et al. 2009). The voices of the people including the poor, marginalized and minority groups are essential for urban planning to ensure equity, fairness and to achieve sustainability (Mahjabeen et al. 2009). Community participation has also proven a useful and successful platform for development and infrastructure provision in developing cities (Ahmed 2017;Ebekozien 2020). Encouraging and empowering members of the public to participate in the urban policy discourse is critical for the success of urban and environmental initiatives (Cheshmehzangi and Dawodu 2019). Public participation minimizes public confrontation and controversy and ensures a well-informed and environmentally conscious populace (Kanu et al. 2018).
The urban planning environment in Nigeria has been critiqued for failing to promote the needed inclusion and excluding most stakeholders from the planning process (Arimah and Adeagbo 2000; Ogbazi 2013; Ogu 2002Ogu , 1999. In Nigeria, public participation in government planning activities is notably low. There is also the perception of citizens that their contributions would have no meaning or impact in the scheme of things (Badiora and Ojo 2021). Generally, compliance with planning regulations is very poor leading to the decaying and unsustainable urban environments that characterize Nigerian cities today (Echendu 2021;Olugbenga and Adekemi 2014).
Based on the tenets of the planning law, Nigeria would be practicing a decentralized planning system. However, the local governments have no control or power over what happens in their jurisdiction with the state mostly in control. Even at the other levels of government, the disregard for the planning law is all too obvious as the plans and commissions to be constituted at the various level are still inexistent (Lamond et al. 2015). Rivers State, our case study, currently has the 2008 Mater Plan in place. Before that, the 1975 Master Plan was in place. During the period the 1975 Master Plan was in use, no review of the plan took place despite the astronomical changes that occurred in the state's urban environment. The current Master Plan by the state's legislation should be reviewed after five years (Echendu 2019) but this has not been done so far. This speaks a lot on the regard (disregard) of the planning laws. There are also points of tension between the national and state planning laws. For example, the federal law mandates that only planning professionals can be members of state planning boards, while the Rivers state laws have contradictory requirements whereby non-planners can form part of the state planning board (Nnah and Owei 2007).
The disconnect of urban plans, realities, results and overall weakness of the Nigerian planning system has led to increased calls for public participation to ensure better coordination of land use planning and physical growth (Dyachia et al. 2017). Limited involvement of citizens in the planning process has implications beyond the immediate poor execution or non-realization of plans. Uninformed citizens are more prone to engaging in environmentally detrimental activities that would impede overall sustainable development visions (Mba 2018). The problem of lack of public participation is not peculiar to one state. It is widespread among the states of the federation. For example, Efobi and Anierobi (2013) revealed that between 2002 and 2011, the Anambra State Urban Development Board (ASUDEB) had no public participation programs in their urban planning activities. This is notwithstanding legislations explicitly mandating public participation and involvement in planning. Despite the poor representation in the formal government planning process, citizens are known to take the lead and actively participate in community-led planning activities. This is evident in the work and activities of community and residents' associations, landlords associations, etc. in fulfilling various local development needs (Ibem 2009;Kuponiyi 2008).
Lack of citizen participation in the urban planning process in Nigeria has been attributed to factors ranging from institutional to inefficient participation facilitation mechanisms and socio-cultural (Aribigbola 2008;Chado and Johar 2016;Chado et al. 2016). Other factors impeding the implementation of laid down planning legislations and policies are regulatory issues, political factors, and prevalent corruption (Echendu 2021;Sam et al. 2017). It would be naive to opine that public participation equals inclusion as in many places, it may be faithfully done as a matter of ticking the box and doing what the law stipulates. In many cases, the opinions and knowledge of locals taking part in the planning process are not given precedence over the state's original vision of a project they deem desirable or that has been backed by their expert assessors (Lahiri-Dutt 2004). However, examples abound where public participation has significantly improved the planning outcome (Brown 2015;Drazkiewicz et al. 2015;Rega and Baldizzone 2015). In a situation like in Nigeria where it is poorly executed or even ignored, it is hard to prevision what the outcome will be. However, the scale tilts in favor of achieving more success when the public is involved in planning. The following section presents and discusses the findings of the interviews with urban planners.

Discussion and findings
The questions posed to the urban planners relevant to this paper centered around the extent of community participation in making urban plans and how the planning practice can be revitalized. The subject of sustainable development and urban planning was also explored with the planners. In this section, the findings have been arranged under two themes-(i) public non-participation in drafting plans and subsequent opposition to plans, (ii) revitalizing planning by public education on sustainability and government non-interference.

Public non-participation in drafting plans and subsequent opposition to plans
Despite the provisions in the national and state laws for urban plans to involve the public, there is still inadequate public inclusion in planning in Rivers State. This issue stems back decades. For instance, the inaugural 1975 Master Plan was prepared by foreign consultants without citizens' input (Aprioku 1998). This is the same for the current 2008 Master Plan in use which was also prepared by a foreign consultancy firm. There was little to no public involvement in the drafting of the plan and overall secrecy as to its detailed contents (Amnesty 2010). There is a culture and history of secrecy around documents that should be made public like Master Plans. For example, during a UN Habitat team investigation on evictions in Port Harcourt in 2009, efforts to view the 1975 city Master Plan which was the extant plan the evictions were based on proved abortive (UNHABITAT 2009, p. 12). This is despite this investigation team having government support and being invited to embark on this mission by the Rivers State Government. Such secrecy around documents that ought to be public needs to change. Going by the unwillingness to make the full plan public, the lack of public involvement at the conception stage is not surprising.

One of the research participants queried thus: 'What is a plan? A plan is supposed to be a synthesis of the needs and aspirations of the people. If the people are not carried along and if they don't understand the plan, the plan cannot work because people will fight against it. But if every person knows about it and understands it, then it will work. The way currently we draw our plans, it doesn't carry the people for whom the plans are really prepared for along. Our plan has not taken deep roots based on that'' (Personal Communication 2019).
Responding to the extent of community participation in preparing plans, another participant highlighted thus: 'Part of what is causing the problem we have in Greater Port Harcourt is the Greater Port Harcourt Master Plan. Communities don't understand it. Even some of the people that are supposed to implement it don't understand it. For example, people had sold their land and you are coming to say no you cannot [sell]. What you will do is engage people, bring people together and say, ok, you have bought this land for XY purpose, but we have this plan prepared with public involvement that has zoned it for a different purpose. Why don't you swap with this person who wants to build for example residential where we have zoned commercial. You will go to where the residential is zoned and swap with somebody who wants to do commercial so that it doesn't take so much from the government. If the people know they can trust the government they will allow such exchanges. But, for now, we are not there yet' (Personal Communication 2019).
The research participants maintain that people are more likely to support official plans when they are part of the process. Such involvement also can also accord members of the public the opportunity to swap land for purposes that align with plans they support. Public participation would enable acceptance of urban plans and better results with implementation. The planners believe that the current city Master Plan incorporates the basic tenets of sustainable development but citizen exclusion in the drafting process leads to public resistance. A participant observes: 'The Master Plan tends to incorporate the tenets of sustainable development but the people don't understand it, so they resist. They don't understand that certain things are good for them because they were not part of the process of the preparation. So, they resist it even when it is good for them '(Personal Communication 2019). This response also circled back to the issue of public participation in the planning process. It highlights that while the plan incorporates sustainable development values, the lack of public participation is a missed opportunity for public education on the benefits and visions of urban plans which can help garner needed public support for more effective execution. This missing element is one reason for poor public support of plans that are seemingly good on paper.
Community opposition to government planning policies is widespread according to the planners. This is due to the initial non-involvement of the community in the drafting of development and planning proposals and policies. The consequence is that even when the policies would benefit the people, they still opposed them. This antagonism could be due to a lack of cooperation between the parties at the initial planning stages. This results in a lack of community understanding of the proposals, planning policies, and the benefits accruable to the community (Echendu and Georgeou 2021). This lack of community understanding of the government's intentions leads to a lack of support, and sometimes outright opposition to new plans and proposals.
The master planning approach has been critiqued as not being inclusive or having avenues to meaningfully involve relevant stakeholders because they are mostly prepared by professional planners in consultancy firms detached from the community perspective of issues (Watson 2009). This could be said to be the case in Rivers State. However, there are still success stories of inclusive involvement of stakeholders in the process of drafting plans. It is crucial to emulate success stories especially as the use of Master Plans seems to be the preferred planning approach in Nigeria. The relevant legislation in Nigeria also makes clear the various aspects and stages citizens are to be involved in. If respected, this would improve the current urban planning process that is far removed from the realities of locals.
Dung-Gwom (2011) believes that the public is constrained to participate in planning due to their level of interest, education, awareness of the value of planning and its impacts. The long period of military rule muffled freedom of expression, leading to poor public engagement with the planning systems and planners at various levels (ibid). However, there are still various community associations in place at the local level working to improve their environment and involved in planning and advocating for their local community. This highlights the need for a more proactive institutional framework that incorporates community involvement in government planning activities and sensitization.

Revitalizing planning by public education on sustainability and government non-interference
This research finds that public participation in planning can be revitalized by better public education on the meaning of sustainability and sustainable development. Our respondents highlight that sustainability is a foreign word to the locals and unless it is communicated in a language locals would understand, it will continue to be an illusion among the public. The implication is that lack of public support would hinder the key role of urban planning as a sustainable development tool. A respondent comments: 'When we talk of sustainability principles, the landowners in the villages, do they understand what those principles are? We can talk about it at the professional level, but at that local level, do they understand? Rather we can say, look, what you do today can get back at you negatively tomorrow, so don't do it. They don't understand it [sustainable development]. What most of us understand is living by the moment, let the next generation fend for itself. So, if we continue with this attitude, then the sustainable principles cannot be imbibed ' (Personal Communication 2019).
It is important to get people to start thinking of their actions in terms of the future and not just fulfilling the basic needs of today. However, that may be a tall order in a developing country like Nigeria where more than half of the population are living in poverty (Omodero 2019). The majority of the poor who live in urban areas (Chirisa et al. 2020) struggle to meet the basic needs. This means they would not necessarily think about the future generation. Poverty is thus an inhibiting factor to thinking in terms of sustainable development and sustainability.
In a previous study by Awuah (2018) with community members on their participation in the planning process, the research participants had varying experiences of community participation in the urban planning processes. Some participants noted instances where planning authorities have involved communities or the private sector in planning while others had no knowledge or experience of such. Nevertheless, the government stakeholders/participants in the research noted the usefulness of public participation. They stated that their experience indicates that the involvement of community stakeholders enriches the process and product of urban planning and helps balance the vision of the state government with that of the people. The overall response from the public stakeholders indicated their willingness to participate. An example of successful collaboration of citizens and government planning bodies has also been achieved in Emene community in Enugu state, where urban planning development authorities and the community stakeholders worked successfully in unison to produce planning schemes for land, infrastructure and services even though this collaboration was originally initiated by the community (Gyau 2018). This outlier example in the Nigerian context demonstrates that such participation is apposite and could yield very positive results.
The planners generally expressed a feeling of powerlessness in carrying out their jobs and complained of a lack of adequate funding to fulfill their mandate. One of the planners in this research occupied a high-ranking position but still expressed a sentiment of powerlessness to execute tasks and foster public participation the way it ought to be done. He expressed sentiments like 'the people do not understand the plan,; the people are not carried along in the planning process,' etc. This goes to show that the planners working for the government do not have the requisite agency to carry out the tasks they are trained to do and for which they have been employed. It is difficult for citizens to have a good understanding of non-inclusive plans or policies. The planning process in Nigeria has been hijacked by politicians with vested interests (Enoguanbhor et al. 2021). Planners are then rendered powerless in carrying out their work. The planners in this research succinctly acknowledge the importance of public participation. Yet, they feel disempowered with no enabling environment to incorporate this essential part of planning in their work. Making laws and not having the mechanisms to execute them is an exercise in futility. To change the current paradigm, political interference in planning work needs to cease and funds required to carry out planning needs to be readily available with urban planners adequately empowered to carry out their duties.

Recommendations
As urban planning ought to be for the overall benefit of citizens, it is only natural to ensure they have a voice in the process. This not only ensures the wide acceptance of urban plans or projects but inculcates in participants, a sense of ownership ensuring compliance and effectiveness.
Based on the research findings, this paper makes the following recommendations.

Reforming the planning process
Reforming the urban planning practice in Nigeria is crucial. This requires a fully participatory process involving consultations with all relevant stakeholders, including the general public, community leaders and civil society groups. The capacity of the administrative system to ensure implementation of plans must also be enhanced by ensuring adequacy of personnel and working equipment. The unrealistic assumptions springing from the foreign base of the Rivers State Plans and the exclusion of citizens in the preparation stages make Urban Plans alien to the people. The result of making Plans not rooted in local realities is a failure during execution because they are not reflective of the needs of the people. Making Plans that incorporate local ideals is pertinent for success. The formal land administration and urban planning practices over the years have largely been divorced from the culture and traditions of the people which appreciates communal cooperation. The integration of stakeholders in formal processes remains unsatisfactory and continues to generate tension. This suggests going back to the drawing board and seeking ways of achieving better engagement with the people in the planning process.

Advocacy
Planners are encouraged to actively seek avenues to connect with locals more and engage in advocacy as it is an important aspect of planning. This need for advocacy was also emphasized by a participant in this research who called for planners to advocate more for the public. As there is widespread understanding of the importance of public participation among the planners, steps should be taken by the government to create avenues to make this a reality. Planners are also in a position to advocate for this crucial aspect of successful planning. They are hereby encouraged to engage more with the government to ensure this becomes an integral and unnegotiable part of planning in their practice especially as the law mandates this.

Deploying digital technology to foster participation
Digital technology is a tool that can be deployed to foster public participation in planning (Wilson et al. 2017). In places where public participation is established, predominant in-person consultations have been deemed laborious. Digital tools have thus been strongly recommended to facilitate public participation (Kahila-Tani et al. 2016). This presents an opportunity for Nigeria to go a step further and promote public participation using digital technology. Its population is predominantly youth who are very techsavvy (Echendu and Okafor 2021;Mbanaso et al. 2015;Morah and Uzochukwu 2019).
Rolling out e-engagement platforms is certain to achieve a high range of engagement and participation. Leveraging technology and social media is a good way to educate and enhance community participation in planning from the youth demographic. This is key as the youth are the future and building and promoting a culture of participation using a means they are already familiar with will ensure continued participation even as they get older. The current political voting system comprising of wards has proven very effective in times of elections. This can easily be replicated in urban planning to achieve higher levels of engagement with the older demographic that may not be as tech-savvy and prefer in-person engagement.

Conclusion
The nature of a nation's urban land law is the most crucial aspect of urban planning (Watson 2009, #1). The extent of implementation and enforcement is even more important. This is because the lack of implementation of laws render it no more useful than the paper it is written on. The interviews with urban planners affirmed the poor level of public participation in planning in Nigeria. They noted that this shortcoming impacts the successful deployment of planning and Plans to achieve overall sustainable development. Good urban planning should lead to the creation of inclusive and functional spaces where citizens' needs and aspirations are met with their innovative capabilities enhanced without sacrificing the urban, ecological, physical environments as well as the cultural integrity (Lwasa and Kinuthia-Njenga 2012). Citizen participation can build trust, commitment, and credibility in the implementation of planning policies and also broaden the knowledge incorporated in planning practice. The dominant view and sentiment expressed by the urban planners in this research affirm that public participation would positively enhance current planning practices.
Overall, despite the recognition of the need for the public to partake in planning in contemporary times, exclusion of citizens remains widespread in urban planning in Nigeria. The government's lack of commitment at the national and state levels to reinforce urban planning institutions with regards to resources, autonomy, resources, qualified personnel, and non-promotion of public participation in the planning process are mitigating factors to sustainable urban planning. The non-involvement of citizens in the planning process does not prevent them from undertaking land developments. The implication is that siloed developments that do not fit into the guiding plan of the city will continue to spring up alongside haphazard and poorly directed settlements, going against the vision of a sustainable city. Public participation in urban development will enhance positive and guided development as well as better support from an engaged public.
Legislatively, efforts have been made by the government to ensure the involvement of the public in the planning process by calling for their input during the drafting of plans. Lacking is the avenue to facilitate participation in practice and ensure sufficient public awareness of the existence of these participation opportunities. Access to relevant information is a key aspect of enhancing public participation. There is enough evidence to assert that public alienation is systemic and has marked the planning culture and system in the country. The culture of participation in planning has been deemed not deep among the citizens, but it appears more like the planning system has not sought to promote public participation.
The predominantly top-down planning approach in Nigeria limits opportunities for involving grassroots actors which is a missed opportunity to learn from grassroots-level approaches, efforts, and actions. Modern-day planning needs to shift from the status quo in recognition that present-day planning and climate challenges can be better addressed by integrated multi-scale cooperation and governance. The planning field in the country is not accorded due relevance by the government as evidenced by the failure to set up the relevant planning institutions mandated by law. This also needs to change.
Proper review, implementation, enforcement, and monitoring of development control functions which are enshrined in physical planning laws, should be undertaken by the government to ensure effective and sustainable public participation for sustainable city development. This should be complemented with adequate funding. To achieve success in urban planning, the need to actively and effectively engage the people cannot be overemphasized. An effective and successful public participation program should be able to allow members of the community to have an active voice in the planning process and access to information. For sustainable urban planning and practice, the people for whom the plans are made must be present at the drawing board. This would ensure the entire planning exercise is not futility when plans fail due to lack of public participation.