A Habermasian analysis of local renewable energy deliberations

Journal of Rural Studies

Volumn 30, Issue , 2013, Pages 86-98

  Fast, Stewart ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Communicative action; Communicative rationality; Deliberative democracy; Futures; Habermas; Opposition; Public sphere; Renewable energy

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; HYDROELECTRIC POWER; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; RURAL ENERGY; SOLAR POWER; WIND POWER;

CANADA;

EID: 84873281733     PISSN: 07430167     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.12.004     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. Aitken M. Why we still don't understand the social aspects of wind power: a critique of key assumptions within the literature. Energy Policy 2010, 38:1834-1841.
2. Angus-Reid Canadians Favour Energy Sources that are Better for the Environment 2007, Angus Reid Poll.
3. Ashworth P., Littleboy A., Graham P., Niemeyer S. Turning the heat on: public engagement in Australia's Energy Future. Renewable Energy and the Public: from NIMBY to Participation 2010, 131-147. Earthscan, London. P. Devine-Wright (Ed.).
4. Barry J., Ellis G. Beyond consensus? Agonism, republicanism and a low carbon future. Renewable Energy and the Public: from NIMBY to Participation 2010, 29-42. Earthscan, London. P. Devine-Wright (Ed.).
5. Barry J., Elllis G., Robinson C. Cool rationalities and hot air: a rhetorical approach to understanding debates on renewable energy. Global Environmental Politics 2008, 8:67-99.
6. Brannstrom C., Jepson W., Persons N. Social perspectives on wind-power development in west Texas. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 2011, 101:839-851.
7. Burningham K., Barnett J., Thrush D. The Limitations of the NIMBY Concept for Understanding Public Engagement with Renewable Energy Technologies: a Literature Review 2006, School of Environment and Development, University of Manchester, p. 20.
8. Calhoun C. Introduction. Habermas and the Public Sphere 1992, 1-48. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. C. Calhoun (Ed.).
9. Cukier W., Ngwenyman O., Bauer R., Middleton C. A critical analysis of media discourse on information technology: preliminary results of a proposed method for critical discourse analysis. Info Systems Journal 2009, 19:175-196.
10. Cumming Cockburn Ltd The Official Plan of the Township of Addington Highlands 2003, http://www.addingtonhighlandstwp.ca/draft-OP-2.pdf.
11. Devine-Wright P. Reconsidering Public Attitudes and Public Acceptance of Renewable Energy Technologies: a Critical Review, Beyond Nimbyism: a Multidisciplinary Investigation of Public Engagement with Renewable Energy Technologies 2007, University of Manchester, Manchester, p. 15.
12. Devine-Wright P. Conclusions. Renewable Energy and the Public: from NIMBY to Participation 2010, 316-321. Earthscan, London. P. Devine-Wright (Ed.).
13. Devine-Wright P. Renewable Energy and the Public: from NIMBY to Participation 2010, Routledge, p. 368.
14. Devine-Wright P., Burningham K., Barnett J., Devine-Wright H., Walker G., Infield D., Evans B. Beyond Nimbyism: Project Summary Report 2009, University of Manchester, Manchester, p. 2.
15. Druker J. Renewable Energy Expo Highlights Economic Options and Opportunities 2011, Frontenac News, Sharbot Lake.
16. Dryzek J. Critical theory as a research program. The Cambridge Companion to Habermas 1995, 97-119. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. S. White (Ed.).
17. Dryzek J. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond 2000, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
18. Dryzek J. The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses 2005, Oxford University Press, Oxford. second ed.
19. EC The Europeans and Energy 2011, Eurobarometer, Brussels, Directorate General for Communication, p. 27.
20. Ellis G., Barry J., Robinson C. Many ways to say 'no', different ways to say 'yes': applying Q-methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2007, 50:517-551.
21. Ericsson K., Huttunen S., Nilsson L., Svenningson P. Bioenergy policy and market development in Finland and Sweden. Energy Policy 2004, 32:1707-1721.
22. Fairclough N. Analyzing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research 2003, Routledge, London.
23. Fast S., McLeman R. Attitudes towards new renewable energy technologies in the Eastern Ontario Highlands. Journal of Rural and Community Development 2012, 7:106-122.
24. Fisher J., Brown K. Wind energy on the Isle of Lewis: implications for deliberative planning. Environment and Planning A 2009, 41:2516-2536.
25. Flyjberg B. Power and Rationality: Democracy in Practice 1998, University of Chicago Press, London.
26. Forester J. Critical Theory and Public Life 1985, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
27. Forester J. Planning in the Face of Power 1989, University of California Press, Los Angeles.
28. Forester J. On fieldwork in an Habermasian way: critical ethnography and the extra-ordinary character of ordinary professional work. Studying Management Critically 2003, 46-65. Sage, London. M. Alvesson, H. Willmott (Eds.).
29. Fraser N. Rethinking the public sphere: a contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Habermas and the Public Sphere 1992, 109-143. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. C. Calhoun (Ed.).
30. Gardiner M.E. Wild publics and grotesque symposiums: Habermas and Bakhtin on dialogue, everyday life and the public sphere. After Habermas: New Perspectives on the Public Sphere 2004, 28-49. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. N. Crossley, J.M. Roberts (Eds.).
31. Habermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action: Volume 1 Reason and the Rationalization of Society 1984, Beacon Press, Boston.
32. Habermas J. Theory of Communicative Action Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: a Critique of Functionalist Reason 1987, Beacon Press.
33. Habermas J. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: an Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society 1989.
34. Habermas J. Further reflections on the public sphere. Habermas and the Public Sphere 1992, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. C. Calhoun (Ed.).
35. Habermas J. Between Facts and Norms 1996, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
36. Habermas J. Some further clarifications on the concept of communicative rationality. On the Pragmatics of Communication 1998, 455. 307-343, MIT Press, Cambridge. M. Cook (Ed.).
37. Habermas J. Public space and political public sphere - the biographical roots of two motifs in my thought. Commemorative Lecture 2004, 10.
38. Hagget C., Toke D. Crossing the great divide - using multi-method analysis to understand opposition to windfarms. Public Administration 2006, 84:103-120.
39. Hajer M., Versteeg W. A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 2005, 7:175-184.
40. Heath J. Communicative Action and Rational Choice 2003, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
41. Hobson K., Niemeyer S. Public responses to climate change: the role of deliberation in building capacity for adaptive action. Global Environmental Change 2011, 21:957-971.
42. Howell P. Public space and the public sphere: political theory and the historical geography of modernity. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 1993, 11:303-322.
43. Howell P. The aspiration towards universality in political theory and political geography. Geoforum 1994, 25:413-427.
44. Howlett K., Ladurantye S. How McGuinty's Green-energy Policy Cost Him a Majority in Ontario 2011, Globe and Mail, Toronto. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ontario-election/how-mcguintys-green-energy-policy-cost-him-a-majority-in-ontario/article2195401/.
45. Hughes, B., 2011. Jane Austen's Conversational Pragmatics: Rational Evaluation and Strategic Concealment in Sense and Sensibility, 200 Years of Sense and Sensibility, Jane Austen Conference, St. Andrews University, p. 13.
46. Katers J., Kaurich J. Heating Fuel Life-cycle Assessment 2006, University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, p. 54.
47. Kemp R. Planning, public hearings, and the politics of discourse. Critical Theory and Public Life 1985, 177-201. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. J. Forester (Ed.).
48. Loos E. Glossary of Linguistic Terms 2003, SIL International, Available on-line:, (accessed 03.08.12.). http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/.
49. Lövbrand E., Khan J. The deliberative turn in green political theory. Environmental Politics and Deliberative Democracy 2010, 47-64. Edward Elgar, London. K. Bäckstrand (Ed.).
50. ® on " Vermont's Energy Future" 2007, Center for Deliberative Opinion Research, University of Texas, p. 158.
51. Mårtensson K., Westerberg K. How to transform local energy systems towards bioenergy? Three strategy models for transformation. Energy Policy 2007, 35:6095-6105.
52. Martin A., Rutagarama E. Just deliberation: can communicative rationality support socially just environmental conservation in rural Africa?. Journal of Rural Studies 2012, 28.
53. McCormick K., Kaberger T. Exploring a pioneering bioenergy system: the case of Enkoping in Sweden. Journal of Cleaner Production 2005, 13:1003-1014.
54. McCormick K., Kaberger T. Key barriers for bioenergy in Europe: economic conditions, know-how and institutional capacity, and supply chain co-ordination. Biomass and Bioenergy 2007, 31:443-452.
55. McKee A. The Public Sphere: an Introduction 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
56. McLeman R. Impacts of population change on vulnerability and the capacity to adapt to climate change and variability: a typology based on lessons from ''a hard country''. Population and Environment 2010, 31:286-316.
57. McLeman R., Gilbert G. Adapting to Climate Change in Addington Highlands: a Report to the Community 2007, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, p. 36.
58. Mouffe C. Deliberative democracy of agonistic pluralism?. Social Research 1999, 66:745-758.
59. Ngwenyama O., Lee A. Communication richness in electronic mail: critical social theory and the contextuality of meaning. MIS Quarterly 1997, 21:145-167.
60. Niemeyer S. The emancipatory effect of deliberation: empirical lessons from mini-publics. Politics and Society 2011, 39:103-140.
61. Ontario Ontario Legislature Passes Green Energy Act 2009, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure.
62. Ontario Green Schools Pilot Initiative 2011, Ministry of Education, (accesssed 31.03.11.). http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/parents/greenSchools.html.
63. Parkins J., Mitchell R. Public participation as public debate: a deliberative turn in natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources 2005, 18:529-540.
64. Pasqualetti M., Schwartz C. Siting solar power in Arizona: a public value failure?. Renewable Energy and the Public 2011, 167-185. Earthscan, London. P. Devine-Wright (Ed.).
65. Roberts J.M., Crossley N. Introduction. After Habermas: New Perspectives on the Public Sphere 2004, Blackwell, Oxford. M.E. Gardiner, N. Crossley (Eds.).
66. Sander-Regier R., McLeman R., Brklachich M., Woodrow M. Planning for climate change in Canadian rural and resource-based communities. Environments 2009, 37:35-58.
67. Senger F., Raven R., Venrooij A. From riches to rags: biofuels, media discourses, and resistance to sustainable energy technologies. Energy Policy 2010, 38:5013-5027.
68. SHEU Survey of household survey of energy use. NRCan 2007, 248. Government of Canada.
69. Statistics Canada Community Profiles for Addington Higlands and North Frontenac 2006.
70. Statistics Canada Census of Population 2011.
71. Taylor B. Between argument and coercion: social coordination in rural environmental governance. Journal of Rural Studies 2010, 26:383-393.
72. Tewdwr-Jones M., Allmendinger P. Deconstructing communicative rationality: a critique of Habermasian collaborative planning. Environment and Planning A 1998, 30:1975-1989.
73. Thomassen L. Habermas: a Guide for the Perplexed 2010, Continuum, London.
74. Truelove H. Energy source perceptions and policy support: image associations, emotional evaluations, and cognitive beliefs. Energy Policy 2012, 45:478-489.
75. Trutnevyte E., Stauffacher M., Scholz R. Supporting energy initiatives in small communities by linking visions with energy scenarios and multi-criteria assessment. Energy Policy 2011, 39:7884-7895.
76. Upham P., Shackley S. The case of a proposed 21.5MWe biomass gasifier in Winkleigh, Devon: implications for governance of renewable energy planning. Energy Policy 2006, 2161-2172.
77. Upham P.S.S., Waterman H. Public and stakeholder perceptions of 2030 bioenergy scenarios for the Yorkshire and Humber region. Energy Policy 2007, 35:4403-4412.
78. van der Horst D. NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2705-2714.
79. Walker G., Cass N. Carbon reduction, " the public" and renewable energy: engaging with socio-technical configurations. Area 2007, 39:458-469.
80. Walker G., Devine-Wright P., Barnett J., Burningham K., Cass N., Devine-Wright H., Speller G., Barton J., Edwards-Jones G., Evans B., Heath Y., Infield D., Parks J., Theobald K. Symmetries, expectations, dynamics and contexts: a framework for understanding public engagement with renewable energy projects. Renewable Energy and the Public: from Nimby to Participation 2010, 1-14. Earthscan, London. P. Devine-Wright (Ed.).
81. Wind Concerns Ontario Green Energy Act Dramatically Reduces McGuinty Government to Minority, Canada News Wire 2011, (accessed 08.03.12.). http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/855177/green-energy-act-dramatically-reduces-mcguinty-government-to-minority.
82. Wolsink M. Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy 2000, 21:49-64.
83. Wood J. " Feed-in" tariffs in Ontario: UnFIT energy policy. Fraser Institute 2011, 31-35. Fraser Forum.
84. Woods M. Conflicting environmental visions of the rural: windfarm development in Mid Wales. Sociologia Ruralis 2003, 43:271-288.
85. Wright E. Habermas as lacking in faith?. Beyond Universal Pragmatics: Studies in the Philosophy of Communcaiton 2010, 1-22. Peter Lang, Oxford. C. Grant (Ed.).
86. Yatchew A., Baziliauskas A. Ontario feed-in tariffs. Energy Policy 2011, 39:3885-3893.
87. Yuen J. Gore Green with Envy Toronto Sun 2009, SunMedia, Toronto.