Direct Democracy in Decision Making for Mega-Projects: A New Culture of “Governance in Partnership”?

Decision making for urban and transport infrastructure mega-projects has been increasingly contested in the recent past. Citizens obviously do not see themselves well enough represented through the elected politicians. Regular information and participation fora do not seem to offer satisfactory co-decision opportunities for increasingly critical citizens. The paper analyses the theoretical background of the current planning crisis and suggests more radical forms of citizens’ involvement: A commonly accepted hypothesis suggests that instruments for direct democratic decision making can open up new pathways to support the break-through of the citizens’ will. As the authors show, however, real empowerment can only be achieved if a level playing field is given. The paper analyses an interesting case study where two referenda on the same issue closely followed each other: Firstly, a top-down initiated referendum with an intentionally restricted formulation of the question, counting with strong media support and, secondly, a bottom-up referendum, initiated by a citizens’ petition. Even though the second referendum was successful, invalidating the previous decisions, a new challenge now lies in the lacking motivation of political leaders to implement it effectively. Finally, the case study helps to formulate some proposals for improvement of direct democratic instruments. The main lesson that can be learned from the case study, however, is that our societies are in desperate need for a new “culture of governance in partnership” between the stakeholders, the people and affected neighbouring communities. Political decision making and planning needs more transparent, fair and honest information, communication, exchange and mutual respect. Such a culture would make societies more liveable and, at the same time, resilient against any sort of challenge.