Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
interfere with the construction of hydro dams in
Uganda are the real enemies of the environment'.
The implied question is: what is the basis for the
claims of those NGOs to have this power? Neither
of the answers that 'we know best' or 'because we
have the power to block loans' are morally attrac-
tive. A desire to be a stakeholder should not
necessarily translate into the right to be one.
So, who can claim to be a stakeholder? Any
definition is a duality: it simultaneously distin-
guishes between what is contained in that defini-
tion and what is excluded. Thus, the definition of
a stakeholder given, for example, in the Common
Implementation Strategy for the Water Frame-
work Directive (2002), is an invitation rather than
a definition: it potentially excludes no one. The
definition of a stakeholder and form of power that
they may possess can be treated together. Power
comes in a number of different levels such as:
.
Because the aim is to deliver integration, but
this has to be done through a fragmented systemof
organizations, a key organizational skill is increas-
ingly the ability to influence the decisions and
practices of other organizations, and the public.
Obvious examples are those influencing land use
planners to promote and require land use devel-
opment that, at a minimum, does not increase the
risk of flooding and, ideally, reduces that risk.
Similarly, the whole purpose of flood warning is
to change the behaviour of the public. Therefore,
skill at stakeholder engagement is increasingly
a key skill for organizations (Le Quesne and
Green 2005). The descriptive questions are: who
has power now to influence either the decision or
its execution? what are those powers and how are
they exercised? Such an analysis is the purpose of
institutional mapping (Green et al. 2007).
The second form of stakeholder engagement is
centred upon who ought to have power. The dif-
ference between consultation and stakeholder
engagement is one of power - who has the power
to decide what to do? In public consultation, the
power to decide is retained by the organization
originally responsible for deciding; under stake-
holder engagement, that power is transferred to
the stakeholders inwhole or in part. Since power is
a zero-sum game, if one party gains more power,
another has less power. The normative questions
are: who ought to have power? what power should
they exercise and how?
Since stakeholder engagement is about a share
in power, a claim to be a stakeholder is a moral
claim to power, a claim that must be supported by
a rationale that justifies that claim relative to the
claims of others. The three basic questions that
have to be addressed are:
1
What are the interests that result in a real claim
to power?
2
What forms of and howmuch power should one
interest have relative to the claims of other
interests?
3
How can those powers be properly exercised?
Themoral question of who ought to have power
cannot be avoided. Thus, President Museve-
ni (2002) stated: 'Therefore, the arrogant so-called
Non Governmental Organizations [NGOs] that
the right to information;
the right to be heard;
.
the right
to have those interests properly
.
considered;
.
the right to take part in the decision process;
.
the right to co-determine the decision.
Thus, different interests may legitimately be
accorded different levels of power: the question
becomes one of who has a moral claim to what
level of power. The Aarhus Convention
(UNECE 1998) establishes the first three powers
as rights to the public where the 'public' is defined
in Article 2 as: 'natural or legal persons and, in
accordance with national legislation or practice,
their associations, organisations, and groups'.
The arguments over the proposed EU Directive
on environmental justice have in turn been about
what associations, organizations or groups should
be recognized as having standing. This debate is
not only a struggle for power but also about legit-
imacy and accountability.
It is the latter two levels of power that create the
difficulty. The starting point of that claim is that
those making it have an interest; those interests
vary and any single individual or organizationmay
have conflicting interests. A reasonably generic
model of the nature of those interests is shown in
Figure 18.1 in the form of a Venn diagram. Some