"Environment and Participation in a Context of Political Modernisation"
This article discusses the relation between environment and participation in the context of different stages of political modernisation.
This article discusses the relation between environment and participation in the context of different stages of political modernisation.
In this article, Magnus Bostrom analyses the role of envrionmental organisations since the early 1960s.
The article deals with some implications of radical uncertainty for participatory democracy, and more precisely for Participatory Technology Assessment (PTA).
In this age of debate it is not news that what constitutes “truth” is often at issue in environmental debates. Michael S. Carolan and Michael M. Bell argue that truth depends essentially on social relations - relations that involve power and knowledge, to be sure, but also identity.
While some have argued that, in democratic societies, people simply have a right to a participatory role, others base arguments for public participation on the idea that lay people may have access to knowledge which is unknown to officially sanctioned experts. This paper reports on a novel empirical approach called “participatory modelling” to analyse and capture such “lay” understandings.
In this article, Baylor L. Johnson argues that in a tragedy of the commons there is no reasonable expectation that individual, voluntary action will succeed.
Tim Jackson examines the influence of the Darwinian metaphor “the struggle for existence” on a variety of scientific theories which inform our current understanding of the prospects for sustainable development.
In his paper, Bruce Morito argues that “intrinsic value” is a concept born in the Western intellectual tradition for purposes of insulating and isolating those to whom intrinsic value can be attributed from one another and their environmental context.
In his paper, Patrick Curry argues in favor of a “relational pluralism,” which provides the basis of a better alternative—ecopluralism—which, properly understood, is necessarily both ecocentric and pluralist.
In this paper Mark A. Michael argues that pragmatists and essentialists are arguing past one another and shows why that is.