Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
public involvement in ecological governance should be conducted pri-
marily through deliberative processes. It is clear that, even if it proves
impossible to address the potential dif
culties with introducing deliber-
ative democracy that I have considered, this would still be more likely to
provide effective support for an ecological transition than participatory
procedures, which do not encourage members of the public to re
ect on
their values. The necessary recourse in the event that people remain
reluctant to change their preferences and lifestyles, notwithstanding
reforms to the political system, may be either to further increase public
participation by devolving responsibility for decision-making or, as I
note at
Section 6.3.2
., to adopt a more directional mode of government.
6.4 Deliberative participation under
ecological governance
Public participation in ecological governance has three main purposes:
to enhance the perceived legitimacy of the system, and therefore the
acceptability of decisions produced under it; to encourage the spread of
ecologically sustainable behaviours throughout society; and to improve
the quality of environmental decisions by ensuring that knowledge of
local impacts and views are available to decision-makers and taken into
account by them.
116
In this concluding section, I consider how arrange-
ments for deliberative participation in decision-making could be
designed to advance these ends.
Opportunities would be provided under ecological governance for
members of the public to participate in developing the raft of draft
plans that local authorities are required to produce as the
rst stage in
the bottom-up planning process. The starting point would be for small
groups to examine issues connected with the reduction of consumption,
the deployment of ecologically preferable policy options, and the with-
drawal of those identi
in localities. Small-scale delib-
erations allow for focused debate and promote a depth of re
ed for
'
sunsetting
'
ection that
may lead participants to reappraise their values and preferences.
117
Empirical evidence from citizens
'
juries and planning cells, both of
116
Chapter 4,
Section 4.6
.
117
G. Smith and C. Wales,
'
Citizens
'
Juries and Deliberative Democracy
'
(2000) 48
Political Studies,51
-
65; Smith,
'
Democratic Innovations
'
,pp.94
-
101; Goodin and
Dryzek,
'
Deliberative Impacts
'
, 221
-
4.
