Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
The roots of this lack of attention to the details of language even within
those analysts of policy who see policy as essentially communicative,
derives from the Habermasian roots of most work on deliberative democ-
racy and its planning applications (Dryzek, 1990, 2000; Healey, 1999).
This identii ed a specii c potential within communication between actors -
that is, the potential to create consensus. Where actors engage in commu-
nication with a performative stance towards mutual understanding, then
consensus between parties is immanent in the communication. The major
constraint on achieving such a consensus is pinpointed as the absence of
an ideal speech situation in which communicative rationality can hold
sway. This has led to the emphasis being placed on the circumstances
within which communication occurs rather than the nature of the commu-
nication in linguistic terms. This has been coni rmed in Habermas's most
recent work (1996). In our chapter we want instead to turn back towards
the language of policy and the detailed analysis of that language in specii c
situations.
There is one particular problem within environmental policy that this
approach seems particularly well suited to address. This concerns the mis-
match between complex environmental problems and simple dominant
policy responses. This simplicity is at odds with the inherent variability
and complexity of the ecosystems whose healthy functioning such policy
aims to sustain. It ignores the fact that environmental problems are char-
acterized by a high degree of uncertainty. On one level, uncertainty exists
as a result of scientists' incomplete understanding of ecosystem function-
ing. Additionally, however, environmental problems are invariably linked
to issues of resource distribution. As a result, there are always economic,
social and political implications of any environmental policy (see, for
example, Wheeler and McDonald, 1986; Rees, 1990; see also, for example,
Flournoy, 1993). As Dryzek (1997) highlights, when ecological systems
interact with economic, social and political systems through the policy
process, the level of uncertainty associated with environmental problems
is greatly magnii ed. Hajer and Wagenaar (2003) refer to this as policy-
making under conditions of 'radical uncertainty'.
Increasing evidence suggests that such uncertainty is often rel ected in
inappropriate environmental policies due to the application of standard-
ized management techniques that ignore the spatial, temporal, social,
economic and political complexity of environmental problems. Leach and
Mearns (1996) give the example of the woodfuel crisis in Africa, which is
widely perceived as a classic example of a supply gap where demand for
woodfuel exceeds supply. This has been met by a standardized response of
mass tree planting by governments, NGOs and inter-governmental organi-
zations. The basic assumptions that dei ne the supply gap, however, ignore
