**4. The investigative method**

In recent years, in the public debate on urban development and citizen involvement, there seems to be growing doubt as to whether the efforts to date will adequately respond to the challenges that are increasingly faced by larger cities. The criticism herein often focuses on existing efforts being reactive in the sense that they typically focus on solving acute problems, whereby the area's resources are often ignored, and the long-term development perspective fades [26]. It is clear from this debate that this tradition need-/problem-based approach to urban development often has several unintended adverse side effects, whereby efforts often create clients rather than active citizens—thus increasing reliance on external assistance in the district. According to McKnight [27], development assistance based on external assistance is a central part of this negative spiral, because local institutions and organizations are thereby pacified and lose functionality, which means that the district gradually loses its power of action and attracts resourceful citizens. With this in mind, it is therefore essential in urban development to allow the district to revitalize itself "from the inside" through local institutions and organizations actively using their existing resources and anchoring in the area to create quality of life and increase the attractiveness of the area. In this context, this process must take place in an autonomous manner for which the area's institutions are responsible—thus assuming ownership—for its creation. From empirical results, it is a central and well-documented point [27]. The above information is a necessity if the desired development process is to achieve sustainability that goes beyond consultancy assistance. If this is to be successful, then the development process must use an optic with a radically different focus than the problem-oriented approach. In this situation, the resource-based approach to urban development

**425**

*Urban Social Sustainability - Case Study; Gellerupparken–Denmark*

(asset-based community development) is one of the most well-founded [26]. Suggestions have been proposed for a development methodology that addresses the above issues as well as potentials, such as the method developed by McKnight [27]. Based on comparative studies of urban development methodologies—and their success rates—the following starting point for urban development is employed: Communities and boroughs can create development themselves by identifying and utilizing existing (but often unrecognized) resources in new ways. This process requires the borough's actors explicitly focus on finding—and using—the area's

Thus, according to [26], the resource-based approach to urban development can

• ABCD is an asset-based approach that uses methods to draw out strengths and successes in a community's shared history as its starting point for change (as in

• Among all the assets that exist in the community, ABCD pays particular attention to the assets inherent in social relationships, as evidenced in formal and informal associations and networks (recognized in research on *social capital*).

• ABCD's community-driven approach is in keeping with the principles and practice of *participatory approaches development* where active participation and empowerment (and prevention of disempowerment) are the basis of practice.

• ABCD is a strategy directed towards sustainable economic development that is community-driven. The reference to community economic development

• ABCD, as a strategy for sustainable economic development, relies on linkages between community-level actors and macrolevel actors in public and private sectors. In fostering these linkages, ABCD also fosters active citizenship engagement to ensure access to public goods and services and to ensure the accountability of local government. It, therefore, contributes to and benefits

Practical work on urban development from this perspective is based on several methodologies that are defined based on the above basic thinking. In this context, a particularly useful tool must be highlighted, which exemplifies the above starting point and thus can be used in development processes to promote resource-based development. One method of involving and engaging the citizen is, according to the American example, to apply a method called appreciative inquiry. The strength of this approach is that it is based on existing resources and potentials. All areas have positive sides and potentials, but it is often necessary to tend to overlook them and focus on the problems instead. People will naturally feel far more committed and eager to take responsibility if they are met with recognition and an attitude that they are a resource rather than a problem. Simultaneously, an appreciative and curious study of local citizens' experiences and opinions about the area will encourage far more participation than a laid back expert attitude. The proposal for a strategy to improve exposed residential areas, therefore, derives solely from the ideas, wishes, and narratives of citizens who either live or work in the area. Citizens have been asked several times and in many different ways about their perception of the

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93124*

be summarized in the description below [28]:

theory is therefore relevant to ABCD strategy.

from a strengthened *civil society*.

**4.1 Appreciative inquiry model**

*appreciative inquiry*).

resources [26, 27].

*Urban Social Sustainability - Case Study; Gellerupparken–Denmark DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93124*

(asset-based community development) is one of the most well-founded [26]. Suggestions have been proposed for a development methodology that addresses the above issues as well as potentials, such as the method developed by McKnight [27]. Based on comparative studies of urban development methodologies—and their success rates—the following starting point for urban development is employed:

Communities and boroughs can create development themselves by identifying and utilizing existing (but often unrecognized) resources in new ways. This process requires the borough's actors explicitly focus on finding—and using—the area's resources [26, 27].

Thus, according to [26], the resource-based approach to urban development can be summarized in the description below [28]:


## **4.1 Appreciative inquiry model**

Practical work on urban development from this perspective is based on several methodologies that are defined based on the above basic thinking. In this context, a particularly useful tool must be highlighted, which exemplifies the above starting point and thus can be used in development processes to promote resource-based development. One method of involving and engaging the citizen is, according to the American example, to apply a method called appreciative inquiry. The strength of this approach is that it is based on existing resources and potentials. All areas have positive sides and potentials, but it is often necessary to tend to overlook them and focus on the problems instead. People will naturally feel far more committed and eager to take responsibility if they are met with recognition and an attitude that they are a resource rather than a problem. Simultaneously, an appreciative and curious study of local citizens' experiences and opinions about the area will encourage far more participation than a laid back expert attitude. The proposal for a strategy to improve exposed residential areas, therefore, derives solely from the ideas, wishes, and narratives of citizens who either live or work in the area. Citizens have been asked several times and in many different ways about their perception of the

area and possible proposals for change in the future. No strategy has been adopted without the support of citizens, and it has always been possible to come up with amendments to both the primary strategy and the most concrete sub-proposals. Amendments, new ideas, and criticisms have been taken seriously and attempted to be incorporated. This approach has slowed down the process, but a human being cannot think that it can be avoided in any way—nor the future process.

Another aspect of the recognizable approach is that it encourages seeing opportunities, allowing the process participants to talk about hopes and dreams for the future. People's need to be recognized and heard, as well as the ability to imagine the best possible imaginable, releases a tremendous amount of energy when given room for it, an energy that is all too often lost in rapid decision-making and political power struggles. This brief presentation of the methodological approach is intended as part of the proposal for a strategy for the development of vulnerable residential areas. It is used extensively in Gellerupparken and other residential areas, and it is no doubt that an appreciative and positive approach will awaken people's desire to participate, which is an invaluable resource. Without citizens' involvement and local roots, development cannot be reversed. Additionally, as a basis for this answer, proposals for change lie in the establishment of close cooperation between book associations, business, and local authorities, which will be discussed in more detail later.

Appreciative inquiry (AI)—or friendly conversation—is a critical methodology in resource-based urban development. It is a transformative approach to change that focuses on collaboration and identifying and working with the positive aspects of organizations, or communities, rather than the problems [29]. This method is based on several research findings, all of which demonstrate that our notions about the future are mainly decisive for our present actions. Therefore, it is essential to focus on strengths and successes as a basis for development rather than problems and shortcomings [30]. What the appreciative approach seeks is to achieve the transformation of a culture from one that sees itself in largely negative terms, and moreover, is, therefore, inclined to become locked into its contrary construction of itself—to one that sees itself as having within it the capacity to enrich and enhance the quality of life of all its stakeholders—and therefore move towards this appreciative construction of itself [30]. AI as a development methodology is, thus, as illustrated below, in sharp contrast to traditional problem-/need-oriented perspectives in terms of the resource-oriented starting point. **Table 1** shows the explicative board based on the "release recognition" model.

The world-renowned Imagine Chicago project (see: www.imaginechicago.org) is an inspiring example of how AI and the resource-based approach have been used to revitalize Chicago neighborhoods characterized by ghetto education through the


**427**

*Urban Social Sustainability - Case Study; Gellerupparken–Denmark*

the continued sustainability of the result.

3.Citizens have a minimum right to be heard.

5.Citizens must have real opportunities to participate.

processes in the future.

must be promoted.

evaluated and developed.

and developed.

citizen involvement:

application of the above principles. The experience of this project, which exemplifies the resource-based approach, has attracted international attention and points to the efforts of the future. With the above starting point, innovative research and international experience seem to be promising with respect to working with citizeninvolving processes in Gellerupparken and the surrounding area. This means that we see citizen involvement as citizen-driven development processes. In this perspective,

the successful citizen engagement process will have two significant benefits:

• In terms of yield, the process metaphorically described results in answers to important questions from the citizens of the area. Thus, the process makes a positive difference in the lives of citizens. Furthermore, this difference must be sufficiently significant that the citizens themselves will take responsibility for

• Process wise: Through the process, the involved parties increase their acting competence and position, so that they are strengthened with respect to similar

This understanding is basically in harmony with the city of Aarhus model of

1.Citizen involvement must be based on the values of the Aarhus municipality.

2.Citizen involvement is a mandatory consideration in the initial phase of a task.

4.If an existing plan is changed, it must state why the "agreement" is being changed.

6.The private involvement in the development of the municipality or local areas

7.Cooperation with councils, associations, and organizations must be maintained

8.Processes, methods, and professional competence must be continually

The understanding of citizen involvement on which this report is based can, based on the Aarhus model, be understood as an effort to explain and translate points 5–7 into a concrete basis for action. We strive to develop methods to create real citizen-driven processes, whereby, through interaction with local actors, we establish a self-sustaining practice that continuously promotes the development of local areas. This endeavor requires that, concerning the Aarhus model, we must perceive citizen involvement in a broader perspective. Generally, citizen involvement is perceived as a means of achieving a given content goal. However, this understanding does not include any focus on building the capacity of citizens to be able to handle similar challenges in the local area independently in the future. Ultimately, the development process itself does not then necessarily create more active citizens. In contrast, development processes in which this aspect is not considered, as pointed out in the above section, entail significant risks for citizens to be positioned

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93124*

#### **Table 1.**

*An explicative board based on the "release recognition" model.*

*Urban Social Sustainability - Case Study; Gellerupparken–Denmark DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93124*

application of the above principles. The experience of this project, which exemplifies the resource-based approach, has attracted international attention and points to the efforts of the future. With the above starting point, innovative research and international experience seem to be promising with respect to working with citizeninvolving processes in Gellerupparken and the surrounding area. This means that we see citizen involvement as citizen-driven development processes. In this perspective, the successful citizen engagement process will have two significant benefits:


This understanding is basically in harmony with the city of Aarhus model of citizen involvement:


The understanding of citizen involvement on which this report is based can, based on the Aarhus model, be understood as an effort to explain and translate points 5–7 into a concrete basis for action. We strive to develop methods to create real citizen-driven processes, whereby, through interaction with local actors, we establish a self-sustaining practice that continuously promotes the development of local areas. This endeavor requires that, concerning the Aarhus model, we must perceive citizen involvement in a broader perspective. Generally, citizen involvement is perceived as a means of achieving a given content goal. However, this understanding does not include any focus on building the capacity of citizens to be able to handle similar challenges in the local area independently in the future. Ultimately, the development process itself does not then necessarily create more active citizens.

In contrast, development processes in which this aspect is not considered, as pointed out in the above section, entail significant risks for citizens to be positioned as clients. With this starting point, we, therefore, consider citizen involvement as a process with a dual objective; a result must be created that is an answer to an essential question of the citizens. Simultaneously, the process must develop the trading skills of the parties involved. This understanding is translated into the following procedure for adjacent writing.
