Public participation evaluation decision-making method for community planning

Abstract

The invention discloses a public participation evaluation decision-making method for community planning, and the method comprises the steps: firstly, carrying out the check of issues: inviting community / village resident workers and community residents to represent together to carry out the discussion and check of community issues, and expanding the questionnaire participating in issuing a community issue collection to the community residents; after community issues are collected and sorted, the staff drop points on the map one by one, and on-site recheck is carried out. Subsequently, community / village resident staff and community residents are invited to score "importance" and "implementability" of the issue. In this way, community residents can participate in the subject checking process, it is guaranteed that a working department can preferentially solve the subject which is important and easy to implement, and meanwhile the subject which is not important but easy to implement for the residents is sequentially implemented; after the difficulty is overcome for a long time, the issue of'very important but more difficult to implement 'can be implemented, so that the decision-making feasibility is higher.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of community planning, in particular to a method for public participation, evaluation and decision-making in community planning. Background Art

[0002] Community planning is a comprehensive spatial governance process guided by residents' needs, involving the collaborative participation of multiple parties such as the government, professional teams, social organizations and community residents. It aims to systematically optimize the community's functional layout, public facilities configuration and community service system.

[0003] The core role of community planning is mainly reflected in its ability to accurately match resource supply with residents' living needs, and to improve the quality of the living environment through micro-renewal, aging-friendly renovation and other means; secondly, to build a co-construction and co-governance mechanism, and use discussion platforms and digital tools to strengthen residents' ability to participate in decision-making and cultivate a sense of community belonging; at the same time, to promote sustainable development, and achieve a comprehensive balance of ecological benefits, social vitality and historical context through the creation of green spaces, the implantation of low-carbon facilities and the continuation of cultural memory.

[0004] However, the current community planning process mainly relies on community staff to make decisions, and ordinary community residents have low participation and are unable to effectively express their needs. As a result, the community rectification decisions made often do not meet the actual problems and needs of community residents, or even if they meet the needs, the residents do not have a strong demand for the decision. This not only takes up limited resources to solve the problem of communicating the level of needs of some residents, but also the issues discussed by staff lack on-site inspections, which can easily lead to misjudgments on the difficulty of implementing decisions. Moreover, they lack the support of community residents, often failing to effectively communicate and solve problems, further resulting in a waste of resources.

[0005] Therefore, a public participation evaluation and decision-making method for community planning is proposed to solve this problem. Summary of the Invention

[0006] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method for public participation evaluation and decision-making in community planning, which solves the current problem of low public participation in community issues and the inability of staff to make reasonable plans for the feasibility of issues based on the strong needs of residents and the difficulty of implementation.

[0007] To achieve the above-mentioned purpose, the present invention provides the following technical solution: a method for public participation in community planning assessment and decision-making, comprising the following steps:

[0008] Step 1: Inventory of issues: First, invite community / village staff and community residents to discuss and inventory community issues, and expand participation by distributing questionnaires to community residents to collect community issues. After sorting out the issues, staff will clearly identify the locations one by one on the map;

[0009] Step 2: Topic Review: Staff will then conduct on-site inspections and reviews based on the topic locations listed on the map, eliminating any non-existent topics to ensure the authenticity of the topic content.

[0010] Step 3: Issue Scoring: Staff then invite community / village staff and residents to score the issues. Scoring is based on two dimensions: the importance of the issue and the feasibility of the issue. The importance of the issue is based on the level of demand from residents, while the feasibility is based on the difficulty of implementing the issue.

[0011] Step 4: Data Analysis: Set the average of residents' ratings as the median value, and categorize topics based on their needs and difficulty into: recommended for near-term implementation, recommended for voluntary implementation by residents, implementation to be implemented after difficulties are resolved in the long term, and postponed and not necessarily implemented. Create a topic evaluation system based on the ratings and participation enthusiasm, and generate a library of near-term and long-term implementation projects.

[0012] Step 5: Implementation: Finally, the data from the implementation project database will guide the community's implementation plan for the next few years, providing a feasible and achievable plan for both the short and long term. New topics can be reviewed, scored, and analyzed before being directly added to the implementation project database. Implementation will then be assigned to the appropriate management department based on the work content, with clear accountability.

[0013] Preferably, in step 1, the content of the topic is determined according to local community problems and needs, for example, topics such as "What problems do you think need to be solved in the community", "What important public spaces in the community are not well utilized", "What places or venues have disappeared in the community", and "What community services should be added in the community" are discussed.

[0014] Preferably, in step 1, the topic can be determined by distributing survey questionnaires online or offline, and residents can fill in the questionnaires to obtain the problems and needs of the local community.

[0015] Preferably, in step 2, based on the data from the on-site field review, the staff can create a table to comprehensively classify and label the community's historical resources, current resources, and community problem needs to facilitate subsequent review.

[0016] Preferably, in step 2, the staff takes photos of the content of the topic during the on-site inspection, which makes it easier for the management staff to intuitively judge the topic and then assign a score.

[0017] Preferably, in step 3, the higher the residents' demand, the more important the issue is, and the lower the difficulty of implementing the issue, the more feasible the issue is.

[0018] Preferably, in step 4, topic tiers are set to divide topics into four tiers of implementation difficulty, wherein the first tier is important and easy to implement, the second tier is unimportant but easy to implement, the third tier is important but difficult to implement, and the fourth tier is unimportant and difficult to implement.

[0019] Preferably, in step 4, issues that are important and easy to implement are recommended for implementation in the near future, issues that are unimportant but easy to implement are recommended for residents to implement spontaneously, issues that are important but difficult to implement are recommended for implementation after difficulties are resolved in the long term, and issues that are postponed and may not be implemented are recommended for unimportant and difficult to implement.

[0020] Preferably, in step 5, the work is divided into corresponding work departments for implementation according to the work content, and the responsible parties are clearly identified. If the work department cannot implement it on its own, it can feedback to the upper level and wait for resources to be available before implementation.

[0021] Preferably, in step 5, the new topic is incorporated into the implementation project library and can be compared with the old topics, so that the staff can refer to the implementation methods of similar topics in the past and quickly obtain a feasible implementation plan for the new topic.

[0022] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0023] This patented method invites community / village staff and community residents to discuss and review community issues, and scores them based on the residents' demand for the issues and the difficulty of implementation, and classifies the feasibility of decisions. This not only allows residents to participate in the issue-solving process, but also ensures that work departments can prioritize issues with high demand from residents and low implementation difficulty, while simultaneously addressing issues with low demand from residents or high implementation difficulty, making decisions more feasible.

[0024] This patented invention analyzes the implementation difficulty of issues and establishes a database of short-term and long-term implementation projects, thereby taking stock of the current resources and problems in the community. This allows new issues to be incorporated into the database and compared with previous similar issues, thus guiding future planning and implementation by neighborhood committees and villages. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0025] The present invention will be described in more detail below by way of examples. These examples are merely illustrative and do not limit the scope of the present invention in any way.

[0026] The present invention provides a technical solution: a method for public participation in community planning assessment and decision-making, comprising the following steps:

[0027] Step 1: Inventory of issues: First, invite community / village staff and community residents to discuss and inventory community issues, and expand participation by distributing questionnaires to community residents to collect community issues. After sorting out the issues, staff will clearly identify the locations one by one on the map;

[0028] Step 2: Topic Review: Staff will then conduct on-site inspections and reviews based on the topic locations listed on the map, eliminating any non-existent topics to ensure the authenticity of the topic content.

[0029] Step 3: Issue Scoring: Staff then invite community / village staff and residents to score the issues. Scoring is based on two dimensions: the importance of the issue and the feasibility of the issue. The importance of the issue is based on the level of demand from residents, while the feasibility is based on the difficulty of implementing the issue.

[0030] Step 4: Data Analysis: Set the average of residents' ratings as the median value, and categorize topics based on their needs and difficulty into: recommended for near-term implementation, recommended for voluntary implementation by residents, implementation to be implemented after difficulties are resolved in the long term, and postponed and not necessarily implemented. Create a topic evaluation system based on the ratings and participation enthusiasm, and generate a library of near-term and long-term implementation projects.

[0031] Step 5: Implementation: Finally, the data from the implementation project database will guide the community's implementation plan for the next few years, providing a feasible and achievable plan for both the short and long term. New topics can be reviewed, scored, and analyzed before being directly added to the implementation project database. Implementation will then be assigned to the appropriate management department based on the work content, with clear accountability.

[0032] Example 1:

[0033] First, we will review the issues and invite community / village staff and community residents to discuss and review community issues together, and expand participation by distributing questionnaires to community residents to collect community issues. After sorting out the topics, staff members clearly marked their locations one by one on a map. Next, the topics were reviewed. Staff members visited the sites one by one according to the locations of the topics marked on the map, and eliminated any non-existent topics to ensure the authenticity of the topic content. The topics were then scored. Staff members scored the topics that actually existed after the review. The scoring was based on two dimensions: the importance of the topic and the feasibility of the topic. The importance of the topic was determined based on the level of demand from residents, and the feasibility was determined based on the difficulty of implementing the topic. In post-data analysis, the average of the residents' scores was set as the median value, and the topics were divided into the following categories based on the demand and difficulty of the topic: recommended for implementation in the near future, recommended for spontaneous implementation by residents, implementation after resolving difficulties, and postponed and not necessarily implemented. Based on the topic scores and the enthusiasm for participation, an issue evaluation system was developed to derive a library of short-term and long-term implementation projects. Finally, the data from the implementation project library was used to guide the community's work implementation plan for the next few years, so that it could obtain a short-term and long-term feasibility guidance plan. When new topics were generated, they could be reviewed, scored, and analyzed and directly planned into the implementation project library.

[0034] Example 2:

[0035] In Example 1, the following steps are added:

[0036] In step 1, the content of the topic is determined according to the problems and needs of the local community. For example, topics such as "What problems do you think need to be solved in the community?", "What important public spaces in the community are not being used well?", "What places or venues have disappeared in the community?", "What community services should be added to the community?" etc. are discussed. Topics can be discussed by distributing survey questionnaires online or offline, and residents can fill in the questionnaires to obtain information about the problems and needs of the local community.

[0037] In step 2, based on the data from the on-site review, staff can create a table to comprehensively classify and plan the community's historical resources, current resources, and problem needs to facilitate subsequent review; staff can take photos of the content of the topic during the on-site inspection, which will facilitate management personnel to intuitively judge the topic and then score it.

[0038] First, an inventory of topics is conducted. Community / village staff and community residents are invited to discuss and inventory community topics. After the community / village staff and community residents raise the topics, the staff will clearly mark the locations one by one on the map. The content of the topics is determined according to the local community's problems and needs. For example, topics such as "What problems do you think need to be solved in the community?", "What important public spaces in the community are not well utilized?", "What places or venues have disappeared in the community?", and "What community services should be added in the community" are discussed. Topics can be discussed through online or offline survey questionnaires, and residents can fill out the questionnaires to understand the local community's problems and needs. Then, the topics are reviewed. Staff will conduct on-site inspections and verifications based on the locations of the topics listed on the map. They will eliminate non-existent topics to ensure the authenticity of the topic content. Based on the data from the on-site field review, staff can create a table to comprehensively classify and plan the community's historical resources, current resources, and problem needs to facilitate subsequent review. Staff will take photos of the topic content during the on-site inspection, which will help management personnel to intuitively judge the topics and make decisions. After that, the staff will score the topics that actually exist after the review. The scoring is based on two dimensions: one is the scoring of the importance of the topic, and the other is the scoring of the feasibility of the topic. The importance of the topic is based on the degree of demand of the residents, and the feasibility is based on the difficulty of implementing the topic. In the subsequent data analysis, the average value of the residents' scores is set as the middle value, and the topics are divided into the following categories according to the demand and difficulty of the topic: recommended for implementation in the near future, recommended for spontaneous implementation by the village group, implementation after resolving difficulties, and postponed and not necessarily implemented. Based on the scoring of the topic and the enthusiasm of participation, an topic evaluation system is created to obtain a library of short-term and long-term implementation projects. Finally, the topic implementation will guide the community's work implementation plan for the next few years based on the data of the implementation project library, so that it can obtain a short-term and long-term feasibility guidance plan, and when new topics are generated, they can be reviewed, scored and analyzed and directly planned into the implementation project library.

[0039] Example 3:

[0040] In Example 2, the following steps are added:

[0041] In step 3, the higher the level of residents' demand, the more important the issue is, and the lower the difficulty of implementing the issue, the more feasible the issue is.

[0042] In step 4, we set up issue tiers and divided them into four tiers of implementation difficulty: the first tier is important and easy to implement, the second tier is unimportant but easy to implement, the third tier is important but difficult to implement, and the fourth tier is unimportant and difficult to implement. Issues recommended for near-term implementation are important and easy to implement, issues recommended for voluntary implementation by residents are unimportant but easy to implement, issues recommended for implementation in the long term after difficulties are resolved are important but difficult to implement, and issues recommended for postponement and uncertainty are unimportant and difficult to implement.

[0043] First, an inventory of topics is conducted. Community / village staff and community residents are invited to discuss and inventory community issues. After the community / village staff and community residents raise the topics, the staff will clearly locate them one by one on the map. The content of the topics is determined by local community problems and needs, such as "What problems do you think need to be solved in the community?", "What important public spaces in the community are not well utilized?", "What places or venues have disappeared in the community?", "What community services should be added in the community?", etc. Topics can be discussed through online or offline survey questionnaires, and residents can fill out the questionnaires to understand the problems and needs of the local community. Then, the topics are reviewed. Staff will conduct on-site inspections and verifications according to the locations of the topics listed on the map. They will eliminate non-existent topics to ensure the authenticity of the topic content. Based on the data from the on-site field review, staff can create a table to comprehensively classify and plan the community's historical resources, current resources, and problem needs to facilitate subsequent review. Staff will take photos of the content of the topics during the on-site inspection, which will help management personnel to intuitively judge the topics and make decisions. Afterwards, the issues were scored. Staff members will score the issues that actually exist after review. Scoring is based on two dimensions: the importance of the issue and the feasibility of the issue. The importance of an issue is based on the level of demand from residents, and the feasibility is based on the difficulty of implementing the issue. The higher the level of demand from residents, the more important the issue, and the lower the difficulty of implementing the issue, the more feasible it is. In post-data analysis, the average of the residents' scores was set as the median value. Based on the demand and difficulty of the issue, the issues were divided into: recommended for implementation in the near future, recommended for spontaneous implementation by village groups, implementation after difficulties are resolved, and postponed and not necessarily implemented. Based on the issue scores and the enthusiasm of participants, an issue evaluation system was created to obtain a library of short-term and long-term implementation projects. The issues were divided into four tiers of implementation difficulty: the first tier is important and easy to implement, the second tier is unimportant but easy to implement, the third tier is important but difficult to implement, and the fourth tier is unimportant and difficult to implement. Issues recommended for near-term implementation are important and easy to implement, those recommended for residents to implement voluntarily are unimportant but easy to implement, those recommended for implementation in the long term after difficulties are resolved are important but difficult to implement, and those recommended for implementation that may or may not be postponed are unimportant and difficult to implement. Finally, for issue implementation, the data from the implementation project database will guide the community's work implementation plan for the next few years, providing a feasible guidance plan for the short and long term. When new issues arise, they can be reviewed, scored, and analyzed before being directly added to the implementation project database.

[0044] Example 4:

[0045] In Example 3, the following steps are added:

[0046] In step 5, the work is divided into corresponding work departments for implementation according to the work content. If the work department cannot implement it on its own, it can provide feedback to the higher level and wait for resources to be available before implementation. New topics are incorporated into the implementation project library for comparison with old topics, making it convenient for staff to refer to the implementation methods of similar topics in the past and quickly obtain feasible implementation plans for new topics.

[0047] First, an inventory of topics is conducted. Community / village staff and community residents are invited to discuss and inventory community issues. After the community / village staff and community residents raise the topics, the staff will clearly locate them one by one on the map. The content of the topics is determined by local community problems and needs, such as "What problems do you think need to be solved in the community?", "What important public spaces in the community are not well utilized?", "What places or venues have disappeared in the community?", "What community services should be added in the community?", etc. Topics can be discussed through online or offline survey questionnaires, and residents can fill out the questionnaires to understand the problems and needs of the local community. Then, the topics are reviewed. Staff will conduct on-site inspections and verifications according to the locations of the topics listed on the map. They will eliminate non-existent topics to ensure the authenticity of the topic content. Based on the data from the on-site field review, staff can create a table to comprehensively classify and plan the community's historical resources, current resources, and problem needs to facilitate subsequent review. Staff will take photos of the content of the topics during the on-site inspection, which will help management personnel to intuitively judge the topics and make decisions. After that, the issues will be scored. The staff will score the issues that actually exist after review. The scoring will be based on two dimensions: one is the score of the importance of the issue, and the other is the score of the feasibility of the issue. The importance of the issue is based on the degree of demand of the residents, and the feasibility is based on the difficulty of implementing the issue. The higher the degree of demand of the residents, the more important the issue is, and the lower the difficulty of implementing the issue, the more feasible the issue is. In the post-data analysis, the average of residents' scores was set as the middle value, and the topics were divided into the following categories according to the needs and difficulty of the topics: recommended for implementation in the near future, recommended for spontaneous implementation by village groups, implementation after difficulties are resolved, and postponed and not necessarily implemented; and a topic evaluation system was developed based on the topic scores and the enthusiasm for participation, resulting in a library of projects for implementation in the near future and long term; the topics were divided into four tiers of implementation difficulty, of which the first tier was important and easy to implement, the second tier was unimportant but easy to implement, the third tier was important but difficult to implement, and the fourth tier was unimportant and difficult to implement; topics recommended for implementation in the near future were important and easy to implement, topics recommended for spontaneous implementation by residents were unimportant but easy to implement, topics recommended for implementation after difficulties are resolved in the long term were important but difficult to implement, and topics postponed and not necessarily implemented were unimportant and difficult to implement. Finally, the implementation of the topic will guide the community's work implementation plan for the next few years based on the data from the implementation project library, so that it can obtain a feasible guidance plan in the short and long term. When a new topic is generated, it can be reviewed, scored and analyzed and then directly planned into the implementation project library; it will be divided into corresponding work departments for implementation according to the work content. If the work department cannot implement it on its own, it can provide feedback to the upper level and wait for resources to be available before implementation; new topics will be incorporated into the implementation project library for comparison with old topics, making it convenient for staff to refer to the implementation methods of similar topics in the past and quickly obtain feasible implementation plans for new topics.

[0048] While embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that various changes, modifications, substitutions, and variations may be made to these embodiments without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, and that the scope of the invention is defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. The public participation, assessment and decision-making method for community planning is characterized by: The following steps are involved: Step 1: Inventory of issues: First, invite community / village staff and community residents to discuss and inventory community issues, and expand participation by distributing questionnaires to community residents to collect community issues. After sorting out the issues, staff will clearly identify the locations one by one on the map; Step 2: Topic Review: Staff will then conduct on-site inspections and reviews based on the topic locations listed on the map, eliminating any non-existent topics to ensure the authenticity of the topic content. Step 3: Issue Scoring: Staff then invite community / village staff and residents to score the issues. Scoring is based on two dimensions: the importance of the issue and the feasibility of the issue. The importance of the issue is based on the level of demand from residents, while the feasibility is based on the difficulty of implementing the issue. Step 4: Data Analysis: Set the average of residents' ratings as the median value, and categorize topics based on their needs and difficulty into: recommended for near-term implementation, recommended for voluntary implementation by residents, implementation to be implemented after difficulties are resolved in the long term, and postponed and not necessarily implemented. Create a topic evaluation system based on the ratings and participation enthusiasm, and generate a library of near-term and long-term implementation projects. Step 5: Implementation: Finally, the data from the implementation project database will guide the community's implementation plan for the next few years, providing a feasible and achievable plan for both the short and long term. New topics can be reviewed, scored, and analyzed before being directly added to the implementation project database. Implementation will then be assigned to the appropriate management department based on the work content, with clear accountability.

2. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step 1, the content of the topic is determined by local community problems and needs, such as: "What problems do you think need to be solved in the community?", "What important public spaces in the community are not well utilized?", "What places or venues have disappeared in the community?", "What community services should be added in the community?" and other topics for discussion.

3. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1 is characterized by: In step 1, the topic can be investigated by distributing survey questionnaires online or offline, and residents can fill in the questionnaires to obtain the problems and needs of the local community.

4. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1 is characterized by: In step 2, based on the data from the on-site verification, staff can create a table to comprehensively classify and label the community's historical resources, current resources, and community problem needs to facilitate subsequent review.

5. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1 is characterized by: In step 2, the staff takes photos of the content of the topic during the on-site inspection, which makes it easier for the management staff to intuitively judge the topic and then give a score.

6. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1 is characterized by: In step 3, the higher the level of residents' demand, the more important the issue is; the lower the difficulty of implementing the issue, the more feasible the issue is.

7. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1 is characterized by: In step 4, the topic tiers are set to divide the topics into four tiers of implementation difficulty, where the first tier is important and easy to implement, the second tier is unimportant but easy to implement, the third tier is important but difficult to implement, and the fourth tier is unimportant and difficult to implement.

8. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1 is characterized by: In step 4, issues that are recommended for implementation in the near future are important and easy to implement, issues that are recommended for residents to implement spontaneously are unimportant but easy to implement, issues that are recommended for implementation after difficulties are resolved in the long term are important but difficult to implement, and issues that are postponed and may not be implemented are unimportant and difficult to implement.

9. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step 5, the work is divided into corresponding work departments according to the content and the responsible parties are clearly defined. If the work department cannot implement it on its own, it can report it upward and wait for resources to be available before implementation.

10. The method for public participation, assessment and decision-making in community planning according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step 5, the new topic is incorporated into the implementation project library and can be compared with the old topics, so that the staff can refer to the implementation methods of similar topics in the past and quickly obtain feasible implementation plans for the new topic.