Trauma-Informed Participation and Deliberation in Spatial Contexts

Conflict, displacement, and natural disasters leave enduring spatial traces, shaping cities through damaged infrastructure, contested territories, and landscapes of memory and loss (Till, 2012). Social and political inequalities are likewise embedded spatially, shaping who is protected, visible, who is able to participate, and who remains exposed to harm or exclusion. Urban planning decisions concerning reconstruction, land use, housing, and public space are therefore deeply entangled with trauma and trauma recovery (Erfan, 2017; Schroeder, 2023). These decisions are not merely technical: they shape how individuals and communities relate to space, institutions, and one another (Calderon de la Barca et al., 2024). Participatory and deliberative approaches are increasingly used to address such complex urban challenges by involving those who inhabit, remember, and have been harmed in these spaces. Yet without careful design, participatory processes risk reproducing power asymmetries or reactivating harm rather than supporting recovery, trust, and inclusion. This paper examines what trauma-informed participation and deliberation might entail in spatial contexts and what existing research reveals about how such approaches have been conceptualised and applied. It presents a systematic literature review of interdisciplinary scholarship at the intersection of trauma, participation, and space, drawing on planning, public health, and participatory and deliberative governance literatures. Principles associated with Trauma-Informed Care (TIC) (SAMHSA, 2014) are used as sensitising concepts to analyse trauma-sensitive participatory practices, without assuming their direct transferability from clinical contexts. The review pursues three aims. First, it maps how participatory processes oriented toward healing, recovery, or trauma sensitivity have been approached in spatial contexts, particularly in settings shaped by conflict, displacement, or structural violence. Second, it examines how these approaches align with or diverge from core TIC principles (such as safety, trust, agency, and empowerment) with particular attention to how space is conceptualised: as a neutral backdrop, a source of harm, or an active medium of recovery. Third, it distinguishes between trauma-informed participatory design (how engagement is organised) and trauma-informed purpose (whether participation seeks to address the underlying spatial and institutional sources of trauma). The paper contributes to debates on democratic innovations in fragile and conflict-affected settings by offering a conceptual foundation for trauma-informed participatory and deliberative practices in urban planning, while also speaking more broadly to the relationship between trauma, space, and participation in contemporary cities.