Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
governance.
114
Indeed, consultation is more likely to con
rm individuals
in their preferences and values (where these are in con
ict with govern-
mental proposals) than to encourage re
ectiononthem.
rst is that, in consultation, the public is invited to comment on
preformed proposals which re
The
ect value judgments that have already
been made, and the values of those previously involved with the
decision-making process. This creates an adversarial situation in which
respondents contest judgments by reference to values they already hold
rather than examine their preferences in a process that would provide an
opportunity for the government to explain why stronger ecological
protection is thought to be necessary and to explore how outcomes
promoting ecological objectives, whilst accommodating values of impor-
tance to citizens in localities and regions, might be identi
ed.
The second and related reason is that consultation processes do not
provideaspaceinwhichparticipantsareabletoreconsiderand,perhaps,
to revise their positions in light of other participants
views and values.
As I note in
Section 6.2.3
., initial reaction to proposals may be modi
'
ed
through re
ection on the perspectives of others in a process where equal
participants have an opportunity to in
uence each other
'
sviews.
However, consultation, which provides no scope for the clari
cation of
initially held views through interaction, is more likely to entrench what-
ever potential there is for opposition to an ecological transition than to
alleviate it. Third, consultation may not increase acceptance of following
decisions signi
uenced
by responses) because the information provided feeds into another
cantly (unless it is clear that these have been in
s
reasoning.
115
It is involvement with the process of reasoning as part of
a problem-solving approach which, as I argue in
Section 6.2.4
., is most
likely to secure acceptance of ecological policies and decisions made for
their implementation.
Consultation
'
'
s obvious limitations for promoting change in attitudes
provides a
nal and, in my view, conclusive reason for arguing that
114
Consultation could be used to engender transformative perspectives when outputs of
preceding deliberative processes and fully reasoned governmental responses to them
are used as supporting materials for the exercise. See Chapter 6,
Section 6.3.3
,and
Niemeyer,
'
The Emancipatory Effect of Deliberation
'
. This section criticises approaches
to consultation that present an authority
sviewonwhyaparticularoutcomewouldbe
desirable both without this having been subjected to prior scrutiny by deliberating
groups, and without an explanation of the conclusions reached by deliberants and the
authority
'
'
s reasons for accepting or rejecting them being made available to consultees.
115
Smith,
'
Democratic Innovations
'
,pp.17
-
18.
