The public meeting as a theatre of dissent: Risk and hazard in land use and environmental planning

Journal of Risk Research

Volumn 11, Issue 1-2, 2008, Pages 119-140

  Boholm, Åsa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Consultation; Public meetings; Risk communication; Stakeholder involvement

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS; LAND USE; PROBLEM SOLVING; SHAREHOLDERS; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

CONSULTATION; PUBLIC MEETINGS; RISK COMMUNICATION; STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT;

RISK PERCEPTION;

EID: 42249098142     PISSN: 13669877     EISSN: 14664461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13669870701633852     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Allwood, J. 2000. An activity-based approach to pragmatics. In Abduction, belief and context: Studies in computational pragmatics, ed. H. Bunt and W. Black. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
2. Baier, M. 2003. Norm och rättsregel: En undersökning av tunnelbygget genom Hallandsås. Lund: Sociologiska Institutionen, Lunds universitet.
3. Banverket. 2000. Projektutredning Hallandsås: Miljökonsekvensbeskrivning. Borlänge, Sweden: Banverket.
4. _. 2004. Årsredovisning. Borlänge, Sweden: Banverket.
5. Bateson, G. 1935. Culture contact and schismogenesis. Man 35: 178-83.
6. _. 1958. Naven: The culture of the latmul people of New Guinea as revealed through a study of the "naven" ceremonial. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7. _. 1973. Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution and epistemology. Herts: Paladin.
8. Binde, P. 2000. Risk discourse: The rhetoric of railway hazards in siting controversy. In Foresight and precaution. Procedings for ESERL 2000, SARS and SRA-Europe annual conference, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 15-17 May 2000, ed. M.P. Cottam, D.W. Harvey, R.P. Pape, and J. Tait. Rotterdam: Balkema.
9. Binde, P., and A. Boholm. 2004. Schismogenesis in a Swedish case of railway planning. In Facility siting: Risk, power and identity in land use planning, ed. Å. Boholm and R. Löfstedt. London: Earthscan.
10. Boholm, Å., ed. 2000. National objectives - Local objections: Railroad modernization in Sweden. Göteborg: CEFOS, Göteborg University.
11. _. 2005a. Greater good in transit: The unwieldy career of a Swedish rail tunnel project. Focaal 46: 21-35.
12. _. 2005b. Riskbedömningars ontologi och epistemologi: Hallandsåsen och dess vatten. In Risk och det levande mänskliga, ed. I. Brinck, S. Halldén, A.-S. Maurin, and J. Persson. Nora: Nya Doxa.
13. _. 2007. Risk communication: A pragmatic approach. In Communication - Action - Meaning. A Festschrift to Jens Allwood, ed. E. Ahlsén, P.J. Henrichsen, R. Hirsch, J. Nivre, Å. Abelin, S. Strömqvist, and S. Nicholson. Göteborg University, Department of Linguistics.
14. Boholm, Å., and R. Löftsedt. 1999. Issues of risk, trust and knowledge: The Hallandsås tunnel case. Ambio 28, no. 6: 556-61.
15. Boholm, Å., and R. Löfstedt, eds. 2004. Facility siting: Risk, power and identity in land use planning. London: Earthscan.
16. Boholm, Å., R. Löfstedt, and U. Stranberg. 1998. Tunnelbygget genom Hallandsås: Lokalsamhällets dilemman. Göteborg: CEFOS, Göteborg University.
17. Brox, O. 2000. Shismogenesis in the wilderness: The reintroduction of predators in Norwegian forests. Ethnos 65, no. 3: 387-404.
18. Chess, C., and K. Purcell. 1999. Public participation and the environment: Do we know what works? Policy Analysis 33, no. 16: 2685-92.
19. Chess, C., J. Burger, and M.H. McDermott. 2005. Speaking like a state: Environmental justice and fish consumption advisories. Society and Natural Resources 18: 267-78.
20. Corvellec, H. 2001. Talks on tracks - debating urban infrastructure projects. Studies in Cultures, Organisations and Societies 7: 25-53.
21. _. 2002. På tal om tredje spåret vid Riddarholmen. Göteborg: Bokförlaget BAS.
22. _. 2007. Arguing for a licence to operate: The case of the Swedish wind power industry. Corporate Communications - An International Journal, 12, no. 2: 12944.
23. Darian-Smith, E. 1999. Bridging divides: The channel and English legal identity in the new Europe. Berkeley, LA: University of California Press.
24. Fiorino, D.J. 1990. Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology & Human Values 15, no. 2: 226-43.
25. Flyvbjerg, B., N. Bruzelius, and W. Rothengatter. 2003. Megaprojects and risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. Fölsterling, F. 2001. Attribution. An introduction to theories, research and applications. London: Taylor and Francis.
27. Futrell, R. 1999. Performative governance. Impression management, teamwork, and conflict containment in city commission proceedings. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 27, no. 4: 494-529.
28. Gell, A. 1998. Art and agency. An anthropological theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Grimes, M. 2005. Democracy's infrastructure. The role of procedural fairness in fostering consent. Göteborgs Studies in Politics 97. Kungälv: Department of Political Science, Göteborg University.
30. Healey, P., and T. Shaw. 1994. Changing meanings of 'environment' in the British planning system. Transaction of Institute of British Geographers 19, no. 4: 425-38.
31. Heider, F. 1958. The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
32. Heiefort, R. 2004. When complexity becomes a problem: 'Law' and 'fairness' on separate tracks in Sweden. In Facility siting: Risk, power and identity in land use planning, ed. Å. Boholm and R. Löfstedt. London: Earthscan.
33. Karlsson, M.M. 2002. Agency and patiency? Back to nature. Philosophical Explorations V, no. 1: 59-81.
34. Latour, B. 1996. Aramis or the love of technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. Löfstedt, R. 2005. Risk management in post-trust societies. New York: Palgrave.
36. Löfstedt, R., and A. Boholm. 1999. Off track in Sweden. Environment 41, no. 4: 16-44.
37. Luhmann, N. 1993. Risk: A sociological theory. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
38. _. 1995. Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
39. Lundgren, R., and A. McMakin, 2004. Risk communication. Columbus: Battle Press.
40. McComas, K. A. 2003a. Trivial pursuits: Participant view of public meetings. Journal of Public Relations Research 15, no. 2: 91-115.
41. _. 2003b. Public meetings and risk amplification: A longitudinal study. Risk Analysis 23, no. 6: 1257-70.
42. Nuckolls, C.W. 1995. The misplaced legacy of Gregory Bateson: Toward a cultural dialectic of knowledge and desire. Cultural Anthropology 10, no. 3: 367-94.
43. Palm, L. 1998. Hallandsåstunneln som tvistefråga, kris och förtroendeproblem. Stockholm: Styrelsen för psykologiskt försvar.
44. Päiviö, J., and H.-G. Wallentius. 2001. The Hallandsås railway tunnel project. In EIA, large development projects and decision making in the Nordic countries, ed. T. Hilding. Stockholm: Rydevik, Nordregio Report.
45. Petts, J. 1999. Public participation and EIA. In Handbook of environmental impact assessment, ed. J. Petts, 145-77. Oxford: Blackwells.
46. Reith, G. 2004. Uncertain times: The notion of 'risk' and the development of modernity. Time & Society 13, nos. 2/3: 382-402.
47. Renn, O. 2006. Participation processes for designing environmental policies. Land Use Policy 23: 34-43.
48. Ryfe, D.M. 2005. Does deliberative democracy work? Annual Review of Political Science 8: 49-71.
49. Rönnborg, P. 2006. Finding the right place: The story about an offshore wind power project. Göteborg: School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University.
50. Sidaway, R. 2005. Resolving environmental disputes. From conflict to consensus. London: Earthscan.
51. Sjölander-Lindqvist, A. 2004. Local environment at stake: The Hallandsås railway tunnel in a social and cultural context. Lund: Department of Human Ecology, Lund University.
52. Soneryd, L. 2003. Public involvement in the planning process: EIA and lessons from the Örebro airport extension, Sweden. Environmental Science & Policy 7: 59-68.
53. Sperber, D., and D. Wilson. 1986/2003. Relevance: Communication and cognition. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
54. Stoogle, R.W., and M.J. Evans. 1990. Holistic conservation and cultural triage: American Indian perspectives on cultural resources. Human Organization 49, no. 2: 91-9.
55. van den Hove, S. 2006. Between consensus and compromise: Acknowledging the negotiation dimension in participatory approaches. Land Use Policy 23: 10-17.