Abstract

In this paper, I evaluate stakeholders involved in city planning and development such as private investors, businesses, city planners, real estate agents, and other community members. Each stakeholder exhibits a different level of bargaining power in the decision-making process. My analysis examines the consequences of this power imbalance and presents a normative claim such that city planners should promote adequate bargaining power in the decision-making process for affected community members to (1) improve understanding of relevant issues and subjective experiences and (2) empower vulnerable groups. By doing so, city planners will be in a better position to promote ethical decision-making in accordance with substantive principles of respect, self-determination, and no-harm. City planners provide an important role in community development by authorizing projects and zoning to ensure that residential, commercial, industrial, and natural areas are used efficiently. However, past and present cases of injustices in city planning and development show that city projects often cause harm to community members through pollution, economic consequences, and displacement. Groups of community members may experience high costs of organization, limited economic capital, or trends of marginalization. These factors contribute to power imbalances among stakeholders in the decision-making process for new city developments. I examine the interpersonal and ethical relationships among community members to explain a source of value in city spaces. I conclude that limited understanding of potential harms and power imbalances among stakeholders often lead to injustices and negative externalities for community members. I defend the position that by improving bargaining power for community members, especially marginalized groups, city planners can limit future cases of development-related injustices by creating an environment better suited to reach substantive ethical goals.