The públic view, the perception of the work, and mostra of all the impavt, are essencial. But thete is a huge mistake to split público from value creation, either directly or indirectly, from público works specially in Walter, waste, garbage recicling. These create wealth in the long termo, at los costa, and change mentality

Sarosh, i believe that to consider the views of the general public in planning for public infrastructural projects is very important. This is because, they (the public) are the end-users of the outcome in such projects. In most cases, government representatives decide what they think are people's expectations without reaching out to them to really and actually inquire how the public would want it to be. In Nigeria for instance, this has invariably make many public projects not to serve the genuine purpose that were intended for. In fact, it is just like spending your money, time and energy to cook for a guest who latter informed you that the meal you cook was not his/her best food. If public consultations are made, i am sure the project would be more meaningful than just executing a public project.

Today most projects come from a top down approach... this does not auger well for local and citizencentric development ... often people's voices are considered as 'complaints' rather than 'consultations'  or 'collaborations '.... hence they tend to become more and more complicated in terms of time, cost and management.

I agree entirely with Kunde.  Consultation with the public is essential in project planning. The days are over when you just hand over anything to the public. Remember the summary of "EQUITY Theory" in motivation.  You motivate a man, when such is acceptable to the beneficiary.  You can "motivate to demotivate". . The power of CONSUMERISM will make people to either accept your product or reject it , no matter how important you think they are. It is important that you find out what the public needs before provision so that projects are not dead on arrival.

It's very important to involve the general public views during planning since this makes them owe the project especially in terms of responsibility and sustainability of a project.

Khwaja (2004) gives an interesting insight and concludes that public engagement all the time is not possible eg in a dam or a bridge construction in a community living in a condition who is not even near to the modern technology and struggle to achieve full literacy, you can only expect to take their node by explaining how it would benefit the rest of the population and you may also offer compensation for their loss.

Community views are important but never useful as the big infrastructural projects are pre- decided and implementer has only to negotiate with the locals. Participatory Development literature is full of such examples.

Mudit,

The example of the dam is giving newer insights to the question. Problems like issues in communicating and creating a proper understanding in this case is definitely a challenge.

Going by Kerala projects, lack of consultation has resulted into widespread protests and stoppage of many projects (as is the case in some other projects in India). Isn't it better to preddecide  projects after user consultation. Local preferences and needs over a long term, I feel could be assessed from users since project teams' involvement is limited in its timeframe to gain thorough local experience without proper local consultation.

Thanks Jose Alberto, Tobias, Kunde, Vedamani, Ishola Rufus and Maximila for sharing your views. 

All your comments have provided newer perspectives to the question and provided areas of further investigation.

Best regards,

Sarosh

Essential -- both for good public relations and politics as well as for making sure that the project fits the needs to users!

 For many infrastructure projects, especially utilities such as water, power, drainage, etc, the need for the work is driven not by the opinions of the public but by the behaviour/consumption of services by the public. Hence, public opinion is usually sought with regard to where and how new services or works will be undertaken (e.g. water treatment plant, timing of pipe works in a main street). This is done in order to minimise complaints from the public and to minimise health/noise/safety impacts on residents close to large scale infrastructure (highways, sewage treatment works, etc). 

It is rare that the public would be consulted on whether or not an infrastructure project should go ahead, since in populated areas these projects are often urgently needed (based on demand) by the time a budget is allocated to them. Utility services companies often are playing 'catch up' with demand and even if they are not, it is not financially efficient to deliver infrastructure before it is needed. The best timing is usually "just in time", which, in real terms, often means "urgently".

I believe that public consultation serves another important purpose, however, and that is the education of the public with regard to important (but often underground/overlooked/forgotten about) services - this of course has a political aspect to it as well, where tax-payers' money is being used for the works.