Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
that arguments be put in terms of the public good.
70
Participants may, as
Meadowcroft notes, insist on their perspectives being
'
admitted to the
.
71
However, if their arguments are to convince
others, they will need to persuade them that their preferred outcome
deliberative exchange
'
'
is
in the wider public interest, or can be justi
ed in terms of general
.
72
principles which can also apply to others
'
problem is that communicative
rationality envisages a complete absence of external in
A second aspect of the
'
no guarantee
'
uence or direc-
tion as a precondition for genuine deliberation. The simple response to
this is that our aim here is not to create ideal situations for rational
communicative dialogue, but to
nd the means that would be most likely
to advance ecological ends whilst adhering to democratic principles.
Public participation in ecological governance would be concerned not
with distilling an ideal position from the pool of possibilities, but with
problem-solving under a statutory framework that is purposefully
designed to guide decisions towards ecologically desirable outcomes. A
directional approach, whilst it may not chime with the deliberative ideal,
is not viewed as objectionable by proponents of discursive democracy.
73
Barry sees no reason to suppose that pure communicative rationality
should be regarded as the only procedural standard.
74
Jacobs also sug-
gests that deliberation is more likely to be effective if it is guided by some
initial sense of what is good or better (whilst allowing scope for this to be
challenged), and that it would be legitimate to provide this by asking
participants to attempt to reach conclusions that advance a positive end
value or that respect negative end values including, in this context, that
preferences for ecologically destructive actions would be beyond the
pale.
75
In this regard, both commentators recognise that deliberation
does not take place in a theoretical bubble, but that it forms part of, and
operates within, the structures and institutions of representative govern-
ment.
76
Deliberative processes will be used not because of their theoret-
ical credibility, but because they are thought likely to serve an end
70
Barry,
'
Rethinking Green Politics
'
,p.217;Meadowcroft,
'
Deliberative Democracy
'
,
p. 185;
Jacobs,
'
Environmental Valuation
'
, pp. 219
-
21; Smith,
'
Deliberative
,p.63.
71
Meadowcroft,
Democracy
'
'
Deliberative Democracy
'
,p.185.
72
Jacobs,
'
Environmental Valuation
'
,p.220.
73
Lövbrand and Khan,
'
The Deliberative Turn
'
, pp. 52
-
4.
74
Barry,
'
Rethinking Green Politics
'
,pp.216
-
17.
75
Jacobs,
'
Environmental Valuation
'
,pp.227
-
8.
76
Barry,
'
Sustainability
'
,p.122;Jacobs,
'
Environmental Valuation
'
,pp.222
-
3. See also
Smith,
'
Democratic Innovations
'
,p.11.
