Deliberating Competence: Theoretical and Practitioner Perspectives on Effective Participatory Appraisal Practice

Science Technology and Human Values

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 421-451

  Chilvers, Jason ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Analytic deliberative processes; Environmental risk; Evaluation; Principles; Public participation; United Kingdom

Indexed keywords

EID: 68049099343     PISSN: 01622439     EISSN: 15528251     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/01622439073075941     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Abelson, J., P. Forest, J. Eyles, P. Smith, E. Martin, and F. Gauvin. 2003. Deliberations about deliberative methods: Issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science and Medicine 57:239-51.
2. Bohman, J. 2000. Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Burgess, J., and J. Chilvers. 2006. Upping the ante: A conceptual framework for designing and evaluating participatory technology assessments. Science and Public Policy 33 (10): 713-28.
4. Burgess, J., and J. Clark. 2006. Evaluating public and stakeholder engagement strategies inenvironmental governance. In Interfaces between Science and Society, ed. A. Peirez, S. Vaz, and S. Tognetti, 225-52. Sheffield: Greenleaf Press.
5. Burgess, J., C. M. Harrison, and P. Filius. 1998. Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning A 30 (8): 1445-60.
6. Charney, J. 2000. Democratic science: Enhancing the role of science in stakeholder-based risk management decision-making. Washington, DC: Health Risk Strategies.
7. Chilvers, J. 2005. Democratising science in the UK: The case of radioactive waste management. In Science and citizens, ed. M. Leach, I. Scoones, and B. Wynne, 237-43. London: Zed Press.
8. Chilvers, J. 2007. Towards analytic-deliberative forms of risk governance in the UK? Reflections on learning in radioactive waste. Journal of Risk Research 10 (2): 197-222.
9. Chilvers, J. in press. Environmental risk, uncertainty and participation: Mapping an emergent epistemic community. Environment and Planning A.
10. Chilvers, J., J. Burgess, and J. Murlis. 2003. Managing radioactive waste safely. Participatory methods workshop report-vol. 1: Final report. Defra/RAS/03.001/Vol1. London: Defra. Available from http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/radioactivity/publications/complete/ pdf/defra_ras-03-001vol1.pdf (accessed December 17, 2004).
11. Collins, H. M., and R. Evans. 2002. The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science 32:235-96.
12. Cooke, B., and U. Kothari, eds. 2001. Participation: The new tyranny? London: Zed Books.
13. Cornwall, A., and G. Pratt. 2003. Pathways to participation: Reflections on PRA. London: ITDG Publishing.
14. CoRWM (Committee on Radioactive Waste Management). 2006. Managing our radioactive waste safety: CoRWM's recommendations to government, July 2006. Available from http://www.corwm.org.uk/pdf/FullReport.pdf (accessed November 6, 2006).
15. Davies, G. 2006a. The sacred and the profane: Biotechnology, rationality, and public debate. Environment and Planning A 38: 423-43.
16. Davies, G. 2006b. Mapping deliberation: Calculation, articulation and intervention in the politics of organ transplantation. Economy and Society 35 (2): 232-58.
17. Davies, G., and J. Burgess. 2004. Challenging the "view from nowhere": Citizen reflections on specialist expertise in a deliberative process. Health and Place 10: 349-61.
18. European Commission. 2001. European governance: A white paper, COM (2001) 428. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
19. Fiorino, D. 1990. Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values 15:226-43.
20. Fischer, F. 2000. Citizens, experts and the environment. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
21. Fischhoff, B. 1995. Risk perception and communication unplugged: Twenty years of process. Risk Analysis 15:137-45.
22. Funtowicz, S. O., and J. R. Ravetz. 1993. Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25 (7): 739-55.
23. GECP 2000. Risky choices, soft disasters: Environmental decision-making under uncertainty. A summary report of findings from the ESRC Global Environmental Change Programme. Sussex: University of Sussex.
24. Habermas, J. 1984. Theory of communicative action-volume 1: Reason and the rationalisation of society. Boston: Beacon Press.
25. Habermas, J. 1987. Theory of communicative action-volume 2: System and lifeworld. Boston: Beacon Press.
26. Hinchliffe, S. 2001. Indeterminacy in-decisions-science, policy and politics in the BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) crisis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 26 (2): 182-204.
27. House of Lords. 2000. Science and society. London: The Stationary Office.
28. Irwin, A. 1995. Citizen Science. London: Routledge.
29. Irwin, A. 2001. Constructing the scientific citizen: Science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Understanding of Science 10 (1): 1-18.
30. Irwin, A. 2006. The politics of talk: Coming to terms with the 'new' scientific governance. Social Studies of Science 36 (2): 299-320.
31. Irwin, A., and M. Michael. 2003. Science, social theory and public knowledge. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
32. Jasanoff, S., and B. Wynne. 1998. Science and decision making. In Human choice and climate change: Volume 1. The societal framework, ed. S. M. Rayner and E. L. Malone, 1-87. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press.
33. Joss, S., and S. Bellucci. 2002. Participatory technology assessment: European perspectives. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
34. Kasemir, B., J. Jager, C. C. Jaeger, and M. T. Gardner. 2003. Public participation in sustainability science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
36. Laird, F. 1993. Participatory analysis, democracy, and technological decision making. Science, Technology, & Human Values 18 (3): 341-61.
37. Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
38. Leach, M., I. Scoones, and B. Wynne, eds. 2005. Science and citizens: Globalization and the challenge of engagement. London: Zed Press.
39. Limoges, C. 1993. Expert knowledge and decision-making in controversy contexts. Public Understanding of Science 2:417-26.
40. Mouffe, C. 1999. Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social Research 66 (3): 745-58.
41. Niemeyer, S., and C. Spash. 2001. Environmental valuation analysis, public deliberation, and their pragmatic syntheses: A critical appraisal. Environment and Planning C 19:567-85.
42. Nowotny, H., P. Scott, and M. Gibbons. 2001. Rethinking Science. Cambridge: Polity Press.
43. OECD. 1979. Technology on trial: Public participation in decision-making related to science and technology. Paris: OECD.
44. Owens, S., T. Rayner, and O. Bina. 2004. New agendas for appraisal: Reflections on theory, practice and research. Environment and Planning A 36: 1943-59.
45. Pellizzoni, L. 2001. The myth of the best argument: Power, deliberation and reason. British Journal of Sociology 52:59-86.
46. Pellizzoni, L. 2003. Uncertainty and participatory democracy. Environmental Values 12:195-224.
47. Perhac, R. M. 1998. Comparative risk assessment: Where does the public fit in? Science, Technology, & Human Values 23 (2): 221-41.
48. Petts, J. 1997. The public-expert interface in local waste management decisions: Expertise, credibility and process. Public Understanding of Science 6 (4): 359-81.
49. Petts, J., J. Homan, and S. Pollard. 2003. Participatory risk assessment: Involving lay audiences in environmental decisions on risk, Environment Agency R&D Technical Report E2-043/ TR/01. Bristol: Environment Agency.
50. Petts, J., and B. Leach. 2000. Evaluating methods for public participation: Literature review. Environment Agency R&D Technical Report E135. Bristol: Environment Agency.
51. POST. 2001. Open channels: Public dialogue in science and technology. London: Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology.
52. RCEP. 1998. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution 21st Report: Setting environmental standards. London: HMSO.
53. Renn, O., and D. Levine. 1991 Credibility and trust in risk communication. In Communicating Risks to the Public, ed. R. Kasperson, 175-219. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
54. Renn, O., T. Webler, H. Rakel, P. Dienel, and B. Johnson. 1993. Public-participation in decision-making: A 3-step procedure. Policy Sciences 26 (3): 189-214.
55. Renn, O., T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, eds. 1995. Fairness and competence in citizen participation: Evaluating models for environmental discourse. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
56. Rose, N. 1999. Powers of freedom: Reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
57. Rowe, G., and L. Frewer. 2000. Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science Technology, & Human Values 25 (1): 3-29.
58. Rowe, G., and L. Frewer. 2004. Evaluating public-participation exercises: A research agenda. Science, Technology, & Human Values 29 (4): 512-57.
59. Rowe, G., T. Horlick-Jones, J. Walls, and N. Pidgeon. 2005. Difficulties in evaluating public engagement initiatives: Reflections on an evaluation of the UK GM Nation? Public debate about transgenic crops. Public Understanding of Science 14 (4): 331-52.
60. Santos, S., and C. Chess. 2003. Evaluating citizen advisory boards: The importance of theory and participant-based criteria and practical implications. Risk Analysis 23 (2): 269-79.
61. Stern, P., and H. Fineberg, eds. 1996. Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society. Washington: National Research Council.
62. Stirling, A. 2005. Opening up or closing down: Analysis, participation and power in the social appraisal of technology. In Science and citizens, ed. M. Leach, I. Scoones, and B. Wynne, 218-31. London: Zed Books.
63. Stirling, A., and S. Mayer. 2001. A novel approach to the appraisal of technological risk: A multicriteria mapping study of a genetically modified crop. Environment and Planning C 19 (4): 529-55.
64. Webler, T. 1995. Right discourse in citizen participation: An evaluative yardstick. In Fairness and competence in citizen participation, ed. O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, 35-86. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
65. Webler, T. 1998. The craft and theory of public participation: A dialectical process. Journal of Risk Research 2 (1): 55-71.
66. Webler, T., H. Kastenholz, and O. Renn. 1995. Public participation in impact assessment: A social learning perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 15:443-63.
67. Webler, T., S. Tuler, and R. Krueger. 2001. What is a good participation process? Five perspectives from the public. Environmental Management 27 (3): 435-50.
68. Wilsdon, J., and R. Willis. 2004. See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream. London: Demos.
69. Wynne, B. 1992. Uncertainty and environmental learning: Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Global Environmental Change 2 (2): 111-27.
70. Wynne, B. 1995. Public understanding of science. In The handbook of science and technology studies, ed. S. Jasanoff, G. Markle, J. Petersen, and T. Pinch, 361-88. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
71. Wynne, B. 2003. Seasick on the third wave? Subverting the hegemony of propositionalism: response to Collins and Evans (2002). Social Studies of Science 33 (3): 401-17.
72. Wynne, B. 2005. Risk as globalising 'democratic' discourse: Framing subjects and citizens. In Science and citizens, ed. M. Leach, I. Scoones, and B. Wynne, 66-82. London: Zed Books.