Key sustainability issues in European sensitive areas - A participatory approach

Sustainability Impact Assessment of Land Use Changes

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 451-470

  Morris, Jake ^a   Camilleri, Marguerite ^b   Moncada, Stefano ^b  

^a FOREST RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^b Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA)   (Malta)

Author keywords

communicative rational; integration; Participatory research; stakeholders; sustainability issues; technical rational

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889825796     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-78648-1_22     Document Type: Chapter

References (36)

1. Aguirre MJ (1995) Professionalizing public policy analysis In S Nagel (Ed.), Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management (Vol. 7). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
2. Collins HM, Evans R (2002) The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience Social Studies of Science 32, 2, 235-96.
3. Commission of the European Communities (2002) Towards a Reinforced Culture of Consultation and Dialogue - General Principles and Minimum Standards for Consultation of Interested Parties by the Commission, Communication from the Commission, COM(2002) final (11/12/2002).
4. Commission of the European Communities (2005), Impact Assessment Guidelines, SEC (2005) 791
5. Cooke B, Kothari U (eds) (2001) Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.
6. DeLeon P (1997) Democracy and the policy sciences Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
7. Dilly O et al. (2008) Key sustainability issues and the spatial classification of sensitive regions in Europe. In: Helming K, Tabbush P, Perez-Soba M (Eds). Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes. Springer, 471-494
8. Dryzek JS (1990) Discursive democracy Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
9. Durning D (1999) The transition from traditional to postpositivist policy analysis: A role for Q methodology' Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 18: 389-410.
10. Eggenberger M, Partidario M (2000) Development of a framework to assist the integration of environmental social and economic issues in spatial planning Impact Assessment Project Appraisal 18(1):201- 7.
11. Fischer F (1990) Technocracy and the politics of expertise Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
12. Fischer F (1993) Citizen participation and the democratization of policy expertise Policy Sciences, 26, 165-187.
13. Fischer F (1998) Beyond empiricism: Policy inquiry from a postpositivist perspective Policy Studies Journal, 26, 129-146.
14. George C (2001) Sustainability appraisal for sustainable development: Integrating everything from jobs to climate change Impact Assessment Project Appraisal 19(1):95 - 106.
15. Gibson R (2001) Specification of sustainability-based environmental assessment decision criteria and implications for determining ''significance'' in environmental assessment. Source: Http://www.sustreport.org/downloads/ SustainabilityEA.doc.
16. Jasanoff S (2003) Breaking the Waves in Science Studies Social Studies of Science 33, 3, 389-400.
17. Kasemir B, Jäger J, Jaeger C, Gardner M (2003) Public Participation in Sustainability Science: A Handbook Cambridge University Press: Cambridge
18. Lee N, Kirkpatrick C (2001) Methodologies for sustainability impact assessments of proposals for new trade agreements Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy Management 3(1):395- 412.
19. Majone G (1989) Evidence, argument, and persuasion in the policy process New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
20. Moncada S, Camilleri M (2007) Key Sustainability Issues in the Maltese Islands: Summary of research carried out as part of Work Package 7.3 of the SENSOR project.
21. Neumayer E (2003) Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
22. NSO (National Statistics Office) (2006). Gainfully Occupied Population: December 2006. News Release No. 102/2007. 15 June 2007, NSO: Valletta.
23. NSO (National Statistics Office) (2007). Gross Domestic Product : January-March 2007. News Release No. 94/2007. 8 June 2007, NSO: Valletta.
24. OECD (1998), Towards Sustainable Development: Environmental Indicators, Paris.
25. OECD (2000) Towards Sustainable Development: Indicators to Measure Progress, Proceedings of the OECD Rome Conference, Paris.
26. OECD (2001) Sustainable Development - Critical Issues, Paris.
27. Pope J, Annandale D, Morrison-Saunders A (2004) Conceptualising sustainability assessment Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24: 595-616.
28. Post R, Kolhoff A, Velthuyse B (1997) Towards integration of assessments with reference to integrated water in third world countries Impact Assessment Project Appraisal 16(1):50.
29. Potschin M, Haines-Young R (2008) Sustainability impact assessments: Limits, thresholds and the sustainability choice space. In: Helming K, Tabbush P, Perez-Soba M (Eds). Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes. Springer, 425-450
30. Sheate W, Dagg S, Richardson J, Aschemann R, Palerm J, Steen U (2003) Integrating the environment into strategic decision-making: Conceptualizing policy SEA European Environment 13(1):1-18.
31. Tabbush P, Frederiksen P, Edwards D (2008) Impact Assessment in the European Commission in relation to multifunctional land use In: Helming K, Tabbush P, Perez-Soba M (Eds). Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes. Springer,35-54
32. Thiel A and König B (2008) An institutional analysis of land use modelling in the European Commission In: Helming K, Tabbush P, Perez-Soba M (Eds). Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes. Springer, 55-75
33. Twigger-Ross C (2003) Emerging approaches to integrated assessment Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment. Marrakech, Morocco. June 2003.
34. Waterton C, Norton L, Morris J (2006) Understanding Loweswater: Interdisciplinary Research in Practice Journal of Agricultural Economics 57(2): 277-293.
35. Weimer D, Vining A (1999) Policy analysis: Concepts and practice (3rd ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
36. Wynne B (2003) Seasick on the Third Wave? Subverting the Hegemony of Propositionalism Social Studies of Science 33, 3, 401-417.