Mechanisms for public participation in environmental policy development - Lessons from Australia's first consensus conference

Environmental and Planning Law Journal

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 258-266

  McDonald, Jan ^a  

^a BOND UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 28744445637     PISSN: 0813300X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Note

References (29)

1. John Ralston Saul, The Unconscious Civilization, Penguin, 1997
2. Australian Musuem, "What is a Consensus Conference", Material provided to registrants of the First Australian Consensus Conference on Gene Technology in the Food Chain Canberra, March 10-12, 199
3. Denmark conducted its first consensus conference in 1987. The first in the United States was conducted in 1997. The success of the first conference in New Zealand was such that a charitable trust has now been established in order to fund future projects. The second consensus conference in New Zealand will consider how the country should manage the problem of brushtail possums.
4. Australian Museum, "The First Australian Consensus Conference: The People and Science Meet on Gene Technology" (undated). Sydney, 1.
5. The topics are as follows: Genetic engineering in agriculture and industry (1987), radiation of foods (1989); how should we apply the increasing knowledge on human genes? (1989); air environment (1990); educational technology (1991); technological animals - intervention in the gametes of higher animals (1992); childlessness (1993); traffic information technology (1994); integrated agricultural production (1994). Slight variations on the model that was used in Australia were tested at conferences in 1993 on personal identification cards and virtual reality.
6. Australian Museum, op cit n.4.
7. Johs Grundahl, "The Danish Consensus Conference Model", located on the web-site of the Danish Board of Technology, http:www.ing.dk:80/tekraad/eng/metods/consens.htm
8. These criteria greatly improve the perception of the conference and its likely acceptance
9. Simon Joss and John Durant Public Participation in Science: the role of consensus conferences in Europe, Science Museum/European Commission, 1995, quoted in Australian Museum, op cit n 4, at 4.
10. This was an essential prerequisite of their selection. The panel consisted of eight women and six men from 19 to 57 years old, drawn from every state and territory. Their educational, economic, social and ethnic backgrounds varied considerably
11. Australin Museum, "Guideliness on Consensus Conferences", Material provided to registrants of the First Australian Consensus Conference on Gene Technology in the Food Chain, March 10-12, 1999.
12. The Panel Report is located on the web-site of the Australian Musueum: www.austmus.gov.com
13. Australia's current negotiating position is strongly supportive of an unregulated approach that subjects the provisions of the Biosafety Protocol to the disciplines of the World Trade Organisation and its various covered agreements.
14. Australian Museum, op cit n 4, at 4.
15. Lars Kluver, "Consensus Conferences at the Danish Board of Technology", in: Simon Joss and John Durant Public Participation in Science: the role of consensus conferences in Europe, Science Museum/European Commission, 1995, located on the Danish Board of Technology website: http:www.ing.dk:80/tekraad/metod/pps/pps.htm, at 4.
16. The ABC's website on the Consensus Conference is located at: http:www.abc.net.au/science
17. Although this observation should be considered in light of the CSIRO's endorsement of the Panel's recommendations.
18. Lars Kluver, op cit nl4, at 3.
19. 'Johs Grundahl, op cit n 7.
20. Michael Beh, "Office to curb gene technology", Courier Mail. 12 May 1999. at 31.
21. The Hon Peter Costello, text of 1999 Budget speech to the Federal Parliament (emphasis added), located on the Department of the Treasury web-site: www.treasury.gov.au/publications/CommonwealthBudget/199902000
22. Dorothy llling, "Beattie Boosts Biotech", The Australian. 12 May 1999, at 33.
23. Johs Gumdahl, op cit n 7.
24. This view is supported by Lars Klüver, op cit n 17, at 5.
25. There do not appear to be any cases decided under the Victorian legislation which relate specifically to groundwater flow and support of buildings and adjacent land
26. th ed, Butterworths, Sydney, 1995), Ch 2, pp 39-65
27. th ed, Seet & Maxwell, London, 1986). Ch 10,pp, 312+316
28. (1990)ATR 81-102
29. (1987) 9 NSWLR 738