Prof. Dr. Drs. h.c. Ortwin Renn, Scientific Project Lead of the Bauen & Wohnen platform, addresses the question of “how acceptance of sustainable urban and settlement planning can be conceptually defined and empirically assessed” in an expert article. He emphasizes that integrative urban planning requires the “consent of the actors involved,” including citizens. What matters most to them was explored within the Bauen & Wohnen project through two citizens’ councils. Based on their design and results, Renn identifies four key factors of acceptance.

What does acceptance mean?

Acceptance does not necessarily imply consent. Rather, it can be understood as comprising three levels: tolerance, positive attitudes, and active engagement. It depends on several factors:

• Orientation and understanding: People expect transparent reasons and arguments for planned changes.
• Self-efficacy: The more a measure is perceived as restricting personal freedom, the lower the level of acceptance.
• Positive risk–benefit balance: People are more likely to accept changes if they themselves or society as a whole benefit.
• Identity: Planning measures that are perceived as part of one’s own living environment and identity tend to receive greater support.

Against this backdrop, citizen participation becomes increasingly important, Renn argues. Communication alone is often insufficient to generate acceptance – especially when measures involve burdens and their overall benefits are not immediately apparent. Early involvement of those affected helps make different perspectives visible and enables the joint development and negotiation of viable solutions.

Citizens’ councils within the Bauen & Wohnen project

In April and May 2025, citizens’ councils were held in Berlin and the Ruhr region, each consisting of two sessions. A key difference from traditional citizens’ councils was the absence of a formal political mandate. While citizens’ councils typically formulate recommendations for municipal decisions that directly affect participants, in this case they were embedded in a scientific research project. Citizens contributed their views and needs as representatives of the broader public on key project-related questions. In doing so, they helped place expert-developed solutions in a societal context. The results fed directly into the project’s ongoing work.

The following topics were discussed in the citizens’ councils:

• Simple housing standards and smaller living spaces
• Densification within neighbourhoods
• Participation and co-creation in neighbourhoods

Based on the results, Renn illustrates the four acceptance factors: citizens are generally willing to compromise when it comes to creating affordable housing – for example, by accepting smaller apartments or densification. However, this willingness is conditional. Measures must be perceived as meaningful by all affected groups, must not benefit only wealthy property owners, and should safeguard quality of life within neighbourhoods as well as access to shared spaces.

Factor risk–benefit balance: Acceptance is particularly high for measures that enable low-income households to participate in urban life and meet basic housing needs. Participants also expressed a willingness to forego certain amenities if this helps reduce rents or ancillary costs, and they place great importance on socially just and balanced planning.

Many participants expressed frustration with regulations and planning decisions made without their involvement. Early, binding, and effective citizen participation is regarded as crucial for the acceptance of construction projects. Citizens want to be involved as active partners in shaping their living environment.

The most important criterion is emotional identification and attachment. Densification is accepted when infrastructure, social structures, and green spaces grow accordingly. Citizens want aesthetic, social, and ecological aspects to be integrated into urban planning. Outdoor spaces that invite social interaction and recreation can reduce the need for large living areas and enhance overall quality of life.

Conclusion

Participatory processes should be designed in a way that allows the four core acceptance criteria – transparency, self-efficacy, benefits, and identification – to be openly discussed and at least partially fulfilled. This creates constructive learning spaces in which stakeholders can collaborate to develop socially acceptable, ecologically sustainable, and economically balanced planning solutions. As Renn emphasizes, “only if citizens are involved from the very beginning in the planning and implementation of intended measures can cities and settlements continue to serve as places of high quality of life and social interaction for all residents.”

Read the full expert article “Acceptance of Urban and Settlement Planning” (in German)