*4.2. Conceptualised Participation*

Public participation and stakeholders' involvement are integrated into the spatial planning process in all observed European countries [18,22]. However, they are approached differently in different countries and even in regions or municipalities within the same countries. The difference also appears in the conditions of particular planning practices. The *conceptualization of participation* captures various approaches and techniques that support the understanding of possible discussions and agreements in the way from a conflict/disagreement towards a consensus-building, which results in the extent to which the outcome of participation and collaboration is considered in a final or binding decision. Conceptualisation allows finding ways to reach sustainability in a decision-making process when assessing stakeholders' preferences in an area. This also means that public participation should be considered as a values-related matter in planning. For instance, in Germany's case, participation is viewed as a cultural value to be embraced in any planning process [21]. Trust is a prerequisite for cooperation, for the resolution of collective action problems, and effective democratic governance. Trust is indeed vital to participants' belief that a meaningful discussion and cooperation with the members of a planning association (committee) is possible [58]. This is especially important if the planning process is driven by an expert approach (often opposite to a deliberative approach). Yet, building and maintaining trust is extremely complex. Trust is deeply connected with risk, power, and modernity. However, citizen engagement and placemaking [59] are crucial processes for improved communication, informed deliberation, and trust-building practice.

*The deliberative planning* method as a form of participatory planning and an urban planning theory focuses on involving the community in spatial planning and management processes. During the discussions about possible further development, the involved local stakeholders may participate, communicate, and deliberate. Often, participatory planning is debated in contrast to deliberative planning [58]. The first includes all points of view in the decision-making process and gathers them all in one vision. However, the second involves those being motivated by an intended outcome and choosing a vision that is based on sound evidence and arguments [60,61]. Deliberative democracy provides principles for spatial planning. The most important is to determine the beneficial conditions and particular collaborative forms, which provides the best possible outcomes and largely contributes to the decision-making process. Therefore, key questions should be formulated: how may different concepts of stakeholders' participation contribute to the binding decision? To what extent does the introduction of a particular concept improve the implementation of what is decided and the decision-making process on the whole? Legacy et al. (2019) recently discussed new ways of conceptualising participation that "can create new informal spaces where injustices and inequalities are voiced and the structures and hegemonies created" [62]. This study on methodology development assumes the interrelation between three processes: (1) conceptual participation, (2) deliberative planning, and (3) decision-making leading towards a consensus-oriented governance model.
