Food for thought: Conditions for discourse reflection in the light of environmental assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 339-346

  Runhaar, Hens ^a   Runhaar, Piety R ^b   Oegema, Tammo ^c  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^c IMSA Amsterdam   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Discourse; Double loop learning; Environmental assessment; Frame; Reflection; Scheme

Indexed keywords

DISCOURSE; DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; FRAME; SCHEME;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS; REFLECTION;

LIGHT REFLECTION;

DATA; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; FOOD SECURITY; KNOWLEDGE; LEARNING; LITERATURE REVIEW; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; STAKEHOLDER;

EID: 77952426317     PISSN: 01959255     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2009.12.001     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Aizen I., Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour 1980, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
2. Argyris C. On organizational learning 1996, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
3. Argyris C. On organizational learning 1999, Blackwell Business, Oxford. Second ed.
4. Argyris C., Schön D. Organizational learning II: theory, method, and practice 1996, Addison-Wesley, Reading (MA).
5. Deutsch M. The resolution of conflict 1973, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
6. Downey H., Brief A. How cognitive structures affect organizational design. The thinking organization 1986, 165-190. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. H. Sims, D. Gioia (Eds.).
7. Dudley G., Richardson J. Competing advocacy coalitions and the process of 'frame reflection': a longitudinal analysis of EU steel policy. J Eur Public Policy 1999, 6(2):225-248.
8. Durning D. A review of Fischer and Forrester (1993) The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Policy Sci 1995, 28(1):102-108.
9. Gray B. Strong opposition: frame-based opposition to collaboration. J Community Appl Psychol 2004, 14(3):166-176.
10. Griffin D., Shwa P., Stacey R. Speaking of complexity in management theory and practice. Organization 1998, 5:315-339.
11. Hajer M., Versteeg W. A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives. J Environ Policy Plann 2005, 7(3):175-184.
12. Healey P. An institutionalist approach to spatial planning. Making strategic plans 1997, 21-36. UCL Press, Innovation in Europe, London. P. Healey, A. Khakee, A. Motte, B. Needham (Eds.).
13. Jørgensen M., Phillips L. Discourse analysis as theory and method 2002, Sage, London.
14. Karl H.A., Susskind L.E., Wallace K.H. A dialogue, not a diatribe. Effective integration of science and policy through joint fact finding. Environment 2007, 49(1):20-34.
15. Kaufman S., Smith J. Framing and reframing in land use change conflicts. J Archit Plann Res 1999, 16(2):164-180.
16. Kolkman M.J., Van der Veen A., Geurts P.A.T.M. Controversies in water management: frames and mental models. Environ Impact Assess Rev 2007, 27(7):685-706.
17. Making sense of intractable environmental conflicts: concepts and cases 2003, Island Press, Washington DC. R. Lewicki, B. Gray, M. Elliott (Eds.).
18. McKee M. Excavating our frames of mind: the key to dialogue and collaboration. Soc Work 2003, 48(3):401-408.
19. Nilsson M., Wiklund H., Finnveden G., Jonsson D.K., Lundberg K., Tyskeng S., et al. Analytical framework and tool kit for SEA follow up. Environ Impact Assess Rev 2009, 29(3):186-199.
20. Pahl-Wostl C., Hare M. Processes of social learning in integrated resources management. J Community Appl Psychol 2004, 14(3):193-206.
21. Peterlin M., Kross B.C., Kontic B. A method for the assessment of changes in environmental perception during an EIA process. Environ Impact Asses Rev 2008, 28(8):533-545.
22. Rein M., Schön D.A. Frame-critical policy analysis and frame-reflective policy practice. Knowl Policy 1996, 9(1):85-104.
23. Robinson M., Bond A. Investigation of different stakeholder views of local resident involvement during environmental impact assessments in the UK. J Environ Asses Policy Manag 2003, 5(1):45-82.
24. Runhaar H., Driessen P.P.J. What makes strategic environmental assessment successful environmental assessment? The role of context in the contribution of SEA to decision-making. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 2007, 25(1):2-14.
25. Runhaar H. Putting SEA in context: a discourse perspective on how SEA contributes to decision-making. Environ Impact Assess Rev 2009, 29(3):200-209.
26. Saarikoski H. When frames conflict: policy dialogue on waste. Environ Plann C Govern Policy 2006, 24(4):615-630.
27. Schein E. Organizational culture and leadership 1985, Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco.
28. Scholten P.W.A., Van Nispen F.K.M. Building bridges across frames? A meta-evaluation of Dutch integration policy. J Public Policy 2008, 28(2):181-205.
29. Schön D.A., Rein M. Frame reflection: toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies 1994, Basic Books, New York.
30. Sharp L., Richardson T. Reflections on Foucauldian discourse analysis in planning and environmental policy research. J Environ Policy Plann 2001, 3(3):193-209.
31. Shmueli D., Elliott M., Kaufman S. Frame changes and the management of intractable conflicts. Confl Res Q 2006, 24(2):207-218.
32. Sinclair A.J., Diduck A., Fitzpatrick P. Conceptualizing learning for sustainability through environmental assessment: critical reflections on 15years of research. Environ Impact Assess Rev 2008, 28(7):415-428.
33. Stanwick P. Mental imagery: an alternative to top management team replacement for declining organizations. J Organ Change Manag 1996, 9(2):47-65.
34. Swart J.A.A., van Andel J. Rethinking the interface between ecology and society. The case of the cockle controversy in the Dutch Wadden Sea. J Appl Ecol 2008, 45(1):82-90.
35. Ten Heuvelhof E., Nauta C. The effects of environmental impact assessment in the Netherlands. Proj Appraisal 1997, 12(1):25-30.
36. Tjosvold D. The cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: accomplishments and challenges. Appl Psychol Int Rev 1998, 47(3):285.
37. Turnhout E., Hisschemöller M., Eijsackers H. Science on Wadden Sea policy: from accommodation to advocacy. Environ Sci Policy 2008, 11(3):227-239.
38. Valve H. Frame conflicts and the formulation of alternatives: environmental assessment of an infrastructure plan. Environ Impact Assess Rev 1999, 19(2):125-142.
39. Van der Heijden K., Eden C. The theory and praxis of reflective learning in strategy making. Managerial and organizational cognition: theory, methods and research 1998, 58-76. Sage, London. C. Eden, J.-C. Spender (Eds.).
40. Van der Linde I. De slag om de Waddenzee. Een terugblik op vijf jaar politieke strijd (The Wadden Sea battle: five years of political struggle; in Dutch) 2008, IMSA Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
41. Van Eeten M.J.G. Controversies. 'Dialogues of the deaf' on science in policy controversies. Sci Public Policy 1999, 26(3):185-192.
42. Van Kouwen FA, Dieperink, C, Schot, PP, Wassen, MJ. Computer-supported cognitive mapping for participatory problem structuring. Environment and Planning A 2009;41(1):63-81.
43. Van Nieuwaal, K. The institutional survival path. A case study on cockle fishery and gas depletion in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Ph.D. thesis, Amsterdam: VU University Amsterdam; 2010 (forthcoming).
44. Verbeeten T. Wijs met de Waddenzee? Een onderzoek naar leerprocessen (Policy learning in the Wadden Sea case; in Dutch). Ph.D. thesis, Utrecht: Utrecht University; 1999.
45. Weick C. Making sense of the organization 2001, Blackwell publishing, Oxford.
46. Yeo R.K. (Re)viewing problem-based learning: an exploratory study on the perceptions of its applicability to the workplace. J Manag Psychol 2007, 22(4):369-391.