Rethinking Public Engagement: From Planner Jargon to Lived Experience

Engaging the public in the future of their towns and cities is a critical, yet often flawed, aspect of urban planning. A recent piece from Strong Towns, “Stop Asking People to Think Like Planners,” by Charles Marohn, argues that current methods frequently miss the mark by posing technical planning questions to residents who are experts in their own lives, not in the intricacies of zoning codes or traffic calming measures.

The author uses a personal anecdote from a survey in his hometown of Brainerd, Minnesota, which asked residents to support “mixed-use development that is focused on integration instead of the separation of land uses.” While agreeing with the sentiment behind the question, Marohn points out that this is not how ordinary people talk. This disconnect highlights a fundamental issue: surveys often ask residents to respond to pre-defined planning solutions rather than to articulate their actual needs and frustrations.

Marohn draws a parallel to Steve Jobs’s famous observation about product design and focus groups. Customers, Jobs argued, don’t necessarily know what they want until they are shown it. They experience frustrations and desires, but not necessarily the technical solutions. Similarly, residents understand the feeling of dangerous intersections, unattainable housing, or unwelcoming neighbourhoods. They may not, however, know that the solution lies in “mixed-use zoning, form-based codes, parking reform, traffic calming, tax increment financing,” or other planning jargon.

The article critiques innovative public engagement techniques discussed by the American Planning Association, such as using restaurant menus or shopping experiences to make participation more engaging. While these efforts are commendable in their attempt to improve the *how* of data collection, Marohn questions whether they are asking the right *what*. The core problem, he suggests, is not the engagement tool itself, but the underlying assumption that planners already know the essential questions to ask.

A shift in questioning

Marohn recounts a successful public engagement session with young people where, after initial predictable answers to standard questions like “What do you like/dislike about your neighbourhood?”, the conversation was redirected. By asking questions such as “How did you get here today?”, “Do you feel safe getting around?”, and “What keeps you from riding the bus?”, the dynamic shifted entirely. Participants began describing their lives, leading to a richer, more detailed, and useful conversation. This approach, Marohn argues, stems from curiosity – a vital missing component in many planning processes that often begin with a hidden assumption of certainty and a desire for public buy-in.

Experimentation over certainty

Organisations like A Better Block are presented as exemplars of a more effective, learning-based approach. Instead of debating the merits of outdoor dining or walkable streets, they create temporary installations—temporary outdoor dining or a temporarily more walkable street—and observe the real-world results. This experimental method, grounded in observing actual behaviour and responses, fosters genuine learning and requires humility from planners.

The Strong Towns approach, as outlined by Marohn, starts with two simple questions: “Where are people struggling?” and “What’s the next smallest thing we can do to address it?” This iterative process of action, observation, learning, and repetition begins with reality and offers a significant advantage over comprehensive plans or abstract visioning exercises.

A call for empathy in planning

The article concludes with a powerful call for planners to learn to think like residents. Residents possess intimate knowledge of their lived experiences – where they struggle, what causes anxiety, and what brings delight. By cultivating curiosity and valuing this experiential knowledge, planners can move beyond jargon-laden surveys and technical questions to uncover the most meaningful issues facing communities. The focus should shift from seeking public approval for pre-determined solutions to a process of genuine discovery driven by resident experience.

Key facts
| Aspect | Description |
|—|—|
| Core Problem Identified | Public engagement methods often ask residents to speak in planning jargon rather than describe their lived experiences. |
| Proposed Solution | Shift focus from technical planning questions to understanding where residents are struggling and taking small, experimental actions to address those struggles. |
| Recommended Approach | Cultivate curiosity, observe real-world outcomes, and learn from residents’ direct experiences. |
| Key Organisation Example | A Better Block, which uses temporary interventions to test ideas and gather data on community response. |

The implications for London’s urban planning are significant. As the city navigates complex challenges in housing, transport, and public space, the way it engages with its diverse population is paramount. Adopting a framework that prioritises understanding residents’ daily struggles and frustrations, rather than their ability to interpret planning documents, could lead to more effective, equitable, and responsive urban development. This means moving beyond consultations that ask for opinions on abstract concepts like “mixed-use integration” and instead focusing on tangible issues like the safety of walking routes, the accessibility of public transport, or the affordability of housing, and then testing small-scale interventions to find real solutions.

Source: Strong Towns, “Stop Asking People to Think Like Planners,” https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2026-7-6-stop-asking-people-to-think-like-planners

Datos clave