Ethical implications of democratic theory for U.S. public participation in environmental impact assessment

Hourdequin, Marion; Landres, Peter; Hanson, Mark J.; Craig, David

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2012.02.001

Cited by 32 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Citizen satisfaction also is enhanced when a participatory process is deemed to be fair. Fairness can be judged by the presence of representation and autonomy throughout the process (Hourdequin et al 2012). Where theories of deliberative democracy have emphasized process, much of the natural resource research has focused on outcomes of participatory processes based on the notion that public participation will lead to improved outcomes.…”

Section: Why Meaningful Public Involvement?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Deliberative democratic theory is founded on equal opportunity to partake in political life, including government agency decisions (Hourdequin et al 2012) about public land. Although worldwide there has been a movement toward decentralization of natural resource management (Ribot 2003), the view that experts should manage and educate the public who are seen as ill-equipped to contribute substantively to the formulation of policy persists in many sectors (Simmons 2007).…”

Section: Why Meaningful Public Involvement?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Participatory processes for public lands: Do provinces practice what they preach?

Miller¹,

Nadeau²

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Here, we analyze the current spaces for public participation in Crown (public) land management through a comparative study that focuses on the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. We define spaces for public participation as opportunities for meaningful public involvement in the decision-making arena of forest management. We examine the experiences of public participation in these provinces in an exploratory study comparing perceptions of participatory processes and outcomes of the processes in these two provinces based on 15 years (1999-2014) of informant experience. The objective is to understand more fully the barriers and bridges to meaningful public participation and relate these perceptions to on-the-ground implementation. A primary goal is to understand how, over time, processes with unsatisfying outcomes shape the perceptions of the participants. Rather than focusing on one particular participatory process, this comparative study assesses participation over time to identify the limitations in the participatory environments of these two provinces. We take a qualitative research approach using semistructured interviews with 42 forestry stakeholders, combined with participant observation and document analysis. This research reveals: (1) the importance of historical and cultural context as ongoing power imbalances shape the current dialogue and spaces for participation; (2) periods of robust and sound attempts at public participation in both provinces, with disappointments in implementation giving rise to a sense of futility, a closed system, and mistrust of government and industry over time; (3) a system of privileged access in opposition to the ideals of deliberative democracy and an equitable decision-making process; (4) in New Brunswick, public land policy implementation that is not reflective of participatory processes or of interests outside government and industry; (5) in Nova Scotia, recent efforts to incorporate values outside the government-industry policy realm, demonstrating an attempt to shift toward a more collaborative system for public land management.

show abstract

Section: Why Meaningful Public Involvement?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Why Meaningful Public Involvement?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory processes for public lands: Do provinces practice what they preach?

Miller¹,

Nadeau²

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may be the case when information is provided but the public is unaware of it, does not know how to access it or is missing the expert knowledge to understand it (Hourdequin et al 2012). The transparent provision of planning documents as well as education on how to locate, interpret and effectively utilize this information are important pre requisites to overcoming the 'expertise barrier' (the lack of scientific, technical or political knowledge; Parthasarathy 2010, p. 355) …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hourdequin et al (2012) even consider it to be a prerequisite for a successful democracy. Hartley and Wood (2005) and Wiklund (2011) found the poor provision of information to be one of the key barriers to effective participation in practice and a reason for nonparticipation in EA.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Access to relevant information enables stakeholders to understand potential impacts, differen tiate various planning alternatives and identify the potential consequences of their own preferences and objectives (Hourdequin et al 2012). The provision of comprehensive information leads to greater transparency and a greater ability to become involved (Kramer et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Access to information and the role of environmental assessment registries for public participation

Odparlik

Köppel

2013

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International practice shows an increasing use of web-based Environmental Assessment (EA) registries or project websites to provide public access to information. In support of statutory public participation, registries inform when to participate and provide relevant documents and the continued availability of information. However, what constitutes good practice in this field? This article proposes a framework for assessing good practice in providing access to information via registries. Based on performance indicators for an 'ideal' registry, the framework allows evaluation in the review categories: framework conditions, notice of projects, provision of documents, accessibility of information and ongoing information regarding the status of the environmental assessment. An explorative case study analysis applies the framework and presents results on the performance of international practice examples.

show abstract

Institutional Analysis on Stakeholder Participation in China's Environmental Impact Assessment: A State–Attribution–Motivation–Interaction–Reengineering Framework

2019

Integr Envir Assess & Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental impact assessments (EIAs) play an essential role in promoting sustainable development by coordinating and balancing economic, social, and environmental objectives. As one of its mandatory components, stakeholder participation (SP) is designed to contribute to the implementation of EIAs as well as the relevant decision making with regard to a proposed project. Stakeholder participation ranges from being a token process to being a very effective practice; it has been criticized as ineffective in an authoritarian context. This research investigates the SP process of project EIAs via 3 case studies. A developed State–Attribution–Motivation– Interaction–Reengineering (SAMIR) framework is used to identify the causes, results, and substantive changes among 3 main actors or organizations: citizens, enterprises, and local governments. It demonstrates that the endogenous interactions among 3 institutional pillars—regulative, normative, and cognitive—are the root of institutional change. Initial cognitive actions can lead to regulative and normative social institutional change, thus stimulating the reengineering of the institutions’ system relevant to SP. To facilitate institutional innovation and reengineering of SP with Chinese characteristics, it is of crucial importance to deeply reform and detail institutional design, to promote the SP governance structural change from a closed model to an open model. In order for such change to occur, the following are recommended: Move from government to governance, have institutional innovations follow the mass line, pay more attention to fairness rather than focusing on efficiency, and in addition, disseminate science and promote actors’ communication. The benefits and advantages are instruments to overcome the “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) impact. And reengineering government structural change from and administration paradigm to a governance paradigm plays a primary role. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:607–620. © 2019 SETAC

show abstract

Ethical implications of democratic theory for U.S. public participation in environmental impact assessment

Cited by 32 publications

References 45 publications

Participatory processes for public lands: Do provinces practice what they preach?

Participatory processes for public lands: Do provinces practice what they preach?

Access to information and the role of environmental assessment registries for public participation

Institutional Analysis on Stakeholder Participation in China's Environmental Impact Assessment: A State–Attribution–Motivation–Interaction–Reengineering Framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About