Liikunnan yhteissuunnittelumetodi : metodin toimivuuden arviointi Jyväskylän Huhtasuon lähiössä

Abstract

This research is part of a wider development project for residential areas started by the Centre for Urban and Regional Studies at Helsinki University of Technology, namely the SOFY-project (combining social and physical conditions in the development of residential areas) and the project of the Ideal Community for Sport by the Finnish Society of Research in Sport and Physical Education. The research covers the major fields of the social sciences of sport - sports planning and sports administration. The purpose of the study was to analyze the appropriateness of the collaborative planning method for sports planning by means of à five-year follow-up study. The demonstrative object of the planning was a typical Finnish residential area, built in the 70's and dominated by blocks of flats. The theory of the habitat was applied as the theoretical framework where the environment was divided into residential, quarter and home habitats. Action research was used as the basic paradigm in the realization of the study. During the collaborative planning process thirteen different kinds of material were collected. The material was divided into quantitative and qualitative data according to the type of gathering. Various community registers, postal inquiry and interview of sports clubs formed the quantitative material. Qualitative material was collected in the form of workbook forms, pupils' essays, from district workers and by interviewing customers at the social services office. The analyze the information, it was first integrated into one data basis using the Geographical Information System (GIS). Combining the quantitative and qualitative information gave a more or less full picture of the residential area to be used as basic data in planning. Qualitative information brought out the experiences of the residents, which in traditional rational planning is not taken sufficiently into account. 298 development suggestions were produced of which over 1/3 were acted on in five years. The most remarkable development goal was the physical functional environment of the quarter's habitat. Those who participated in planning found the collaborative planning method extremely useful for owing to it, two thirds of the participants had changed their ways of working by the end of the collaborative planning period. When evaluating the collaborative planning method, the bureaucratic nature of the planning and the weak commitment of political decision-makers to projects merging in the course of planning were seen as negative points. The planning method served well in realizing suggestions concerning residential areas and quarters-because most of the suggestions could be carried out and because many people became interested in developing their own living and working environment. The collaborative planning method seems to be appropriate also for strategic planning at the city level even if people who are non-professionally oriented toward planning lack the knowledge and skill of visualizing urban entities. At least local people have experiences, expertises and feelings associated with their own habitats. Collaborative planning in particular is suitable for developing small-scale habitats and can thus complement strategic planning. In the conclusions of the research a new collaborative planning procedure is presented as follows: 1) Collaborative planning training for all participants before starting the planning process, 2) A light, flexible and broad planning organization, 3) Computer-aided data-gathering combined with resident participation in the action research, 4) Preplanning connected with resident participation, 5) Preparing a collaborative plan together with people of the planning object (public, private and voluntary sectors in the planning area), 6) Publication of the collaborative plan by all the planning participants, and 7) Ensuring the follow-up to the realization of the collaborative plan together with the planning participants.