Democratic participation: A critical element of precautionary public health decision-making

New Solutions

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 93-111

  Tickner, Joel A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS LOWELL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0003015724     PISSN: 10482911     EISSN: 15413772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/en1t-f9a1-lv0p-bllr     Document Type: Note

References (33)

1. Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle, Brussels, February 2, 2000, COM 2000 (1).
2. C. Raffensperger and J. Tickner (eds.), Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle, Island Press, Washington, D.C., 1999.
3. T. Webler and O. Renn, A Brief Primer on Participation: Philosophy and Practice, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse. O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 17-34, 1995.
4. P. Stern and H. Fineberg (eds.), Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1996.
5. R. Sclove and M. Scammell, Practicing the Principle, in Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle, C. Raffensperger and J. Tickner (eds.), Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 252-265, 1999.
6. D. Fiorino, Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms, Science, Technology & Human Values, 15: 2, pp. 226-244, 1990.
7. F. Laird, Participatory Analysis, Democracy, and Technological Decision-Making, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18: 3, pp. 341-362, 1993.
8. R. Burroughs, When Stakeholders Choose: Process, Knowledge, and Motivation in Water Quality Decisions, Society & Natural Resources, 12: 8, pp. 797-810, 1999.
9. S. Funtowicz and J. Ravetz, Three Types of Risk Assessment and the Emergence of Post-Normal Science, in Social Theories of Risk, S. Krimsky and D. Golding (eds.), Praeger, Westport, Connecticut, pp. 251-274, 1992.
10. J. Fixdal, Consensus Conferences as “Extended Peer Groups,” Science and Public Policy, 24: 6, pp. 366-376, 1997.
11. O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, 1995.
12. N. Ashford and K. Rest, Public Participation in Contaminated Communities, Center for Technology, Policy, and Industrial Development, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, March 1999.
13. T. Dietz, Democracy and Science, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. xxvii-xix, 1995.
14. T. Webler, “Right” Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 35-86, 1995.
15. S. Arnstein, A Ladder of Citizen Participation, American Insitute of Planners Journal, pp. 216-224, July 1969.
16. R. Sclove, Democratic Politics of Technology: The Missing Half-Using Democratic Criteria in Participatory Technology Decisions, The Loka Institute, Amherst, Massachusetts, September 1999.
17. R. Sclove, Democracy and Technology, The Guilford Press, New York, 1995.
18. J. Tickner, Precaution in Practice: A Framework for Implementing the Precautionary Principle, dissertation, University of Massachusetts Lowell, 2000.
19. S. Lewis and D. Henkels, Good Neighbor Agreements: A Tool for Environmental and Social Justice, Social Justice, 23: 4, 1996.
20. J. Raloff, Democratizing Science: Science Shops are Tackling Research For and With Communities, Science News, 154, pp. 298-300, 1998.
21. F. Lynn and J. Karetz, The Redemption of Citizen Advisory Committees: A Perspective from Critical Theory, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 87-102, 1995.
22. A. Vari, Citizens’ Advisory Committee as a Model for Public Participation: A Multiple-Criteria Evaluation, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 103-116, 1995.
23. N. Crosby, Citizen Juries: One Solution for Difficult Environmental Questions, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 157-174, 1995.
24. A. Armour, The Citizens’ Jury Model of Public Participation: A Critical Evaluation, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 175-188, 1995.
25. P. Deniel and O. Renn, Planning Cells: A Gate for “Fractal” Mediation, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 141-156, 1995.
26. S. Joss and J. Durant, Consensus Conferences: A Review of the Danish, Dutch and UK Approaches to this Special Form of Technology Assessment, and an Assessment of the Options for a Proposed Swiss Consensus Conference, The Science Museum Library, London, April 1994.
27. L. Kluver, Consensus conferences at the Danish Board of Technology, in Public Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe, S. Joss and J. Durant (eds.), The Science Museum, London, pp. 41-52, 1996.
28. J. Fixdal, The Danish Scenario Workshops, unpublished manuscript, Centre for Technology and Culture (TMV), University of Oslo, Oslo, 1996.
29. R. Bilderbeek and I. Anderson, Involving Citizens in Sustainable Development: Experiences from European Scenario Workshops on Urban Ecology, Danish Board of Technology, Copenhagen, 1994.
30. D. Fiorino, Regulatory Negotiation as a Form of Public Participation, in Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse, O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 223-238, 1995.
31. C. Caldart and N. Ashford, Negotiation as a Means of Developing and Implementing Occupational Health and Safety Policy, The Harvard Environmental Law Review, 23: 1, pp. 141-202, 1999.
32. L. Aurela, The Federal Advisory Committee Act and Its Failure to Work Effectively in the Environmental Context, Boston College Environmental Law Review, 23: 1, pp. 87-120, 1995.
33. A. Stirling, On Science and Precaution in the Management of Technological Risk, Science and Technology Policy Research Unit-SPRU, University of Sussex, Sussex United Kingdom. Available at www.jrc.es, 1999.