In search of arenas for democratic deliberation: a Habermasian review of environmental assessment

In this paper the deliberative potential of environmental assessment (EA) is explored. The analysis is structured around four principles derived from Jürgen Habermas's conception of discourse as an ideal procedure for rational and democratic decision-making. The results show that there are many barriers to an implementation of the Habermasian principles. Nevertheless, it is concluded that EA has a ‘hidden’ deliberative potential, which follows from the institutional flexibility of EA, that is, because EA legislation specifies minimal requirement for public participation, requirements that developers and authorities can exceed by using more inclusive and more dialogue-based participatory tools. Finally, the need for additional investigations of deliberation in EA is discussed.

[1]  Stephen K. White,et al.  Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy@@@The Cambridge Companion to Habermas , 1997 .

[2]  Judith Petts,et al.  Barriers to Deliberative Participation in EIA: Learning from Waste Policies, Plans and Projects , 2003 .

[3]  Erika Harris,et al.  Democracy in the European Union , 2005 .

[4]  J. Habermas.  Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action , 1990 .

[5]  J. Habermas.  Three Normative Models of Democracy , 1994, Democracy and Difference.

[6]  J. Bohman,et al.  Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics , 1997 .

[7]  S. Chambers,et al.  Reasonable Democracy: Jürgen Habermas and the Politics of Discourse , 1996 .

[8]  David Miller,et al.  Deliberative Democracy and Social Choice , 1992 .

[9]  Patsy Healey,et al.  The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. , 2001 .

[10]  Maarten A. Hajer,et al.  Deliberative Policy Analysis: Contents , 2003 .

[11]  A. Thornley.  Theoretical perspectives on planning participation , 1977 .

[12]  J. Habermas,et al.  Constitutional Democracy , 2001 .

[13]  Heli Saarikoski,et al.  Environmental impact assessment (EIA) as collaborative learning process , 2000 .

[14]  James S. Fishkin,et al.  Deliberative polling and public consultation , 2000 .

[15]  A John Sinclair,et al.  Public Involvement in Environmental Assessment: The Case of the Nonparticipant , 2002, Environmental management.

[16]  C. Pateman.  Participation and democratic theory , 1970 .

[17]  Charles C. Alton,et al.  Let us make impact assessment more accessible , 2003 .

[18]  Rick L. Lawrence,et al.  Choosing Public Participation Methods for Natural Resources: A Context-Specific Guide , 2001 .

[19]  J Petts,et al.  Municipal Waste Management: Inequities and the Role of Deliberation , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[20]  J. Innes.  Planning Through Consensus Building: A New View of the Comprehensive Planning Ideal , 1996 .

[21]  James S. Fishkin,et al.  Debating Deliberative Democracy , 2003 .

[22]  John S. Dryzek,et al.  Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science , 1992 .

[23]  Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science , 1993 .

[24]  J. Dryzek.  Deliberative Democracy And Beyond , 2000 .

[25]  Will Kymlicka,et al.  Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 1990 .

[26]  Adam Barker,et al.  An evaluation of EIA system performance in eight EU countries , 1999 .

[27]  B. Barber.  Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age , 1985 .

[28]  E. Eriksen,et al.  Democracy in the European Union: Integration Through Deliberation? , 2000 .

[29]  Bruce Mitchell,et al.  Learning, Public Involvement and Environmental Assessment: A Canadian Case Study , 2003 .

[30]  Frank Fischer,et al.  Reframing Public Policy , 2003 .

[31]  A. Diduck,et al.  Public involvement in EA in Canada: a transformative learning perspective , 2001 .

[32]  Johan Woltjer,et al.  The 'Public Support Machine': Notions of the Function of Participatory Planning by Dutch Infrastructure Planners , 2002 .

[33]  Alan Bond,et al.  Public participation in EIA of nuclear power plant decommissioning projects: a case study analysis , 2004 .

[34]  Lizzie Jackson,et al.  The ladder of participation , 2007 .

[35]  J. Glicken.  Getting stakeholder participation ‘right’: a discussion of participatory processes and possible pitfalls , 2000 .

[36]  Simon Joss,et al.  Danish consensus conferences as a model of participatory technology assessment: An impact study of consensus conferences on Danish Parliament and Danish public debate , 1998 .

[37]  赫尓徳,et al.  民主的模式 = Models of democracy , 1986 .

[38]  Hans Wiklund,et al.  A Habermasian analysis of the deliberative democratic potential of ICT-enabled services in Swedish municipalities , 2005, New Media Soc..

[39]  Sherry R. Amstein.  “A Ladder of Citizen Participation” , 1969 .

[40]  Lars Emmelin,et al.  Evaluating environmental impact assessment systems ‐ part 1: Theoretical and methodological considerations , 1998 .

[41]  Robert Marshall,et al.  Public Involvement and Planning: Looking beyond the One to the Many , 2000 .

[42]  J. Innes,et al.  Deliberative Policy Analysis: Collaborative policymaking: governance through dialogue , 2003 .

[43]  John Boyle,et al.  Cultural influences on implementing environmental impact assessment: insights from thailand, indonesia, and malaysia , 1998 .

[44]  Philip Pettit,et al.  Democracy, Electoral and Contestatory , 2000 .

[45]  Moses I. Finley.  Democracy ancient and modern , 1974 .

[46]  Juan R Palerm.  Public participation in eia in hungary: Analysis through three case studies , 1999 .

[47]  Bernard Manin,et al.  On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation , 1987 .

[48]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  Planning Cells: A Gate to “Fractal” Mediation , 1995 .

[49]  T. Webler,et al.  Public Participation in Impact Assess-ment: A Social Learning Perspective , 1995 .

[50]  B. Sweetman.  Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy , 1997 .

[51]  Hans Wiklund.  Arenas for Democratic Deliberation: Decision-Making in an Infrastructure Project in Sweden , 2002 .

[52]  T. Koontz,et al.  Public hearings for EIAs in post-communist Bulgaria: do they work? , 2004 .

[53]  Brian Tew,et al.  Economic Co-operation in Europe. A Study of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. , 1957 .

[54]  Patricia Fitzpatrick,et al.  Learning through public involvement in environmental assessment hearings. , 2003, Journal of environmental management.

[55]  Lars Emmelin,et al.  Evaluating Nordic Environmental Impact Assessment - Part 2 : Professional Culture as an Aid in understanding Implementation , 1998 .

[56]  E. Leknes,et al.  The roles of EIA in the decision-making process , 2001 .

[57]  Hugh Wilkins,et al.  The need for subjectivity in EIA: discourse as a tool for sustainable development , 2003 .

[58]  Ned Crosby,et al.  Citizens Juries: One Solution for Difficult Environmental Questions , 1995 .

[59]  John Uhr,et al.  Deliberative democracy in Australia , 1998 .

[60]  F. Fischer.  Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices , 2003 .

[61]  Tuija Hilding-Rydevik,et al.  Planning for Sustainable Development - the practice and potential of Environmental Assessment , 2004 .

[62]  Tim Richardson,et al.  Environmental assessment and planning theory: four short stories about power, multiple rationality, and ethics , 2005 .

[63]  William R. Sheate,et al.  Community participation and environmental decision-making in the Niger Delta , 2004 .

[64]  T. Sager.  Communicative Planning Theory , 1994 .

[65]  John Sinclair,et al.  Public education: An undervalued component of the environmental assessment public involvement process , 1995 .

[66]  Luca Del Furia,et al.  The effectiveness of provisions and quality of practices concerning public participation in EIA in Italy , 2000 .

[67]  J. Knight,et al.  Aggregation and Deliberation: On the Possibility of Democratic Legitimacy , 1994 .

[68]  Dominique Renaud,et al.  Advisory Committee: A Powerful Tool for Helping Decision Makers in Environmental Issues , 1997, Environmental management.

[69]  R. Dahl.  A Preface to Democratic Theory , 1956 .

[70]  J. Palerm,et al.  Environmental impact assessment in Mexico: an analysis from a ‘consolidating democracy’ perspective , 2004 .

[71]  J. Bohman.  Communication, Ideology, and Democratic Theory , 1990, American Political Science Review.

[72]  J. Elliott,et al.  PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND SOCIAL ACCEPTABILITY IN THE PHILIPPINE EIA PROCESS , 2000 .

[73]  S. Arnstein,et al.  Ladder of Citizen Participation , 2020 .

[74]  Judith Petts,et al.  Evaluating the Effectiveness of Deliberative Processes: Waste Management Case-studies , 2001 .

[75]  J. Habermas.  Towards a Communication‐Concept of Rational Collective Will‐Formation. A Thought‐Experiment , 1989 .

[76]  A. Downs.  An Economic Theory of Democracy , 1957 .

[77]  J. Palerm,et al.  An Empirical‐Theoretical Analysis Framework for Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment , 2000 .

[78]  T. Webler,et al.  What Is a Good Public Participation Process? Five Perspectives from the Public , 2001, Environmental management.

[79]  David Thacher.  Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society , 2005 .

[80]  J. Dryzek.  Deliberative democracy and beyond : liberals, critics, contestations , 2000 .

[81]  Stephen Macedo,et al.  Deliberative politics : essays on democracy and disagreement , 1999 .

[82]  J. Schumpeter.  Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy , 1943 .

[83]  Jon Elster,et al.  THE MARKET AND THE FORUM : Three varieties of political theory , 2005 .