Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
appropriate initiative for a responsible administration to pursue. Their
success in presenting the argument will become apparent from the extent
that citizen participants in plan-making processes are willing to accept
the validity of the government
s position, from their own willingness to
take an active part in identifying ecologically desirable solutions rather
than limiting themselves to a critique of proposals placed before them,
and by how radical the resulting strategies are. It would also doubtless be
revealed in subsequent voting patterns.
Two question marks hang over the claim that participation in delib-
erative democratic practices would signi
'
cantly enhance the acceptabil-
ity of ecological governance. The
rst is that deliberation, because it
allows for open-ended debate of issues, may not result in outcomes that
favour ecological protection.
51
This would not be problematic in circum-
stances where the government
s position is not accepted by a minority of
participants. Barton expresses con
'
dence that gains in the credibility
and legitimacy of decision-making stemming from public participation
in general would
produce a greater level of satisfaction even amongst
parties who have not got what they want
'
.
52
The absence of unanimity is
also not regarded as fatal to the successful conduct of deliberation.
53
What is important is that conclusions have the support of those involved
whether because the processes by which they were reached are seen as
fair or because the reasoning behind the majority view is understood and
accepted by opponents as a valid position even though their view dif-
fers.
54
In this regard, an additional educative effect that deliberation may
have is that it provides participants with
'
an insight into the moral and
practical complexity of political judgment
'
.
55
Of greater concern would
be a situation in which there is widespread rejection of the argument
that steps should be taken to reduce ecological stresses. I consider
further at
Section 6.3.1
.theperceiveddif
'
culty that deliberative partic-
ipation is not certain to yield environmentally positive outcomes
51
E. Lövbrand and J. Khan,
in
K. Bäckstrand, J. Khan, A. Kronsell and E. Lövbrand (eds) Environmental Politics and
Deliberative Democracy: Examining the Promise of New Modes of Governance
(Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2010), pp. 52
'
The Deliberative Turn in Green Political Theory
'
-
4.
52
Barton,
'
Underlying Concepts
'
,p.105.
53
Jacobs,
'
Environmental Valuation
'
, p. 221; Baber and Bartlett,
'
Deliberative
Environmental Politics
'
,pp.127
-
9.
54
Smith,
'
Deliberative Democracy
'
,p.58;Jacobs,
'
Environmental Valuation
'
, p. 221;
J. Petts,
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Deliberative Processes: Waste Management
Case-studies
'
'
(2001) 44 Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 219
-
20.
55
Meadowcroft,
'
Deliberative Democracy
'
,p.186.
