IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/inrace/201667.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South FloridaPublic participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South Florida

Author

Listed:
  • Ogden, Laura

Abstract

The “ecosystem” is the conceptual model guiding environmental restoration projects in the Florida Everglades, a large wetlands region in the southern United States. According to applied ecological frameworks, ecosystems are geographies (of various temporal and spatial scales) where systemic interrelationships of organisms and habitat occur. With current project estimates at 14.8 billion dollars, ecosystem restoration in South Florida represents one of the largest and most expensive environmental projects ever attempted. In this article, I provide an overview of the changes to the Florida Everglades which have led to the need for restorative interventions. I then outline the conceptual framework guiding ecosystem management in South Florida, focusing on the transformation of this framework that occurs through its institutionalization into a set of management and planning practices. The article ends with a discussion of how the “public” is conceptualized within this institutionalized ecosystem management framework, and the ramifications of this conceptualization for Everglades restoration public engagement activit

Suggested Citation

  • Ogden, Laura, 2003. "Public participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South FloridaPublic participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoratio," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 80.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:inrace:201667
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.201667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/201667/files/80-53-74.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.201667?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robin Gregory & Tim McDaniels & Daryl Fields, 2001. "Decision Aiding, Not Dispute Resolution: Creating Insights through Structured Environmental Decisions," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 415-432.
    2. Milon, J. Walter & Hodges, Alan W., 2000. "Who Wants to Pay for Everglades Restoration?," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 15(2), pages 1-5.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laura Ogden, 2006. "Public participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South Florida," Post-Print hal-01201128, HAL.
    2. Laura Ogden, 2006. "Public participation in environmental decision-making: a case study of ecosystem restoration in South Florida," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 80, pages 53-73.
    3. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    4. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    5. Baran, E. & Jantunen, T. & Chheng, P., 2006. "Developing a consultative Bayesian model for integrated management of aquatic resources: an inland coastal zone case study," IWMI Books, Reports H039117, International Water Management Institute.
    6. Marleen Kerkhof, 2006. "Making a difference: On the constraints of consensus building and the relevance of deliberation in stakeholder dialogues," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 39(3), pages 279-299, September.
    7. Stefan A. Hajkowicz, 2012. "For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environmental Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 331-344, May.
    8. B. M. Kellett & R. I. Beilin & K. L. Bristow & G. Moore & F. H. S. Chiew, 2007. "Reflecting on stakeholders’ perceptions in an Ecological Risk Assessment workshop: Lessons for practitioners," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 109-117, March.
    9. Joseph Árvai & Delanie Kellon & Ramón León & Robin Gregory & Robert Richardson, 2014. "Structuring international development decisions: confronting trade-offs between land use and community development in Costa Rica," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 224-236, June.
    10. I. Linkov & F. K. Satterstrom & G. Kiker & T. P. Seager & T. Bridges & K. H. Gardner & S. H. Rogers & D. A. Belluck & A. Meyer, 2006. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 61-78, February.
    11. Failing, L. & Gregory, R. & Harstone, M., 2007. "Integrating science and local knowledge in environmental risk management: A decision-focused approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 47-60, October.
    12. L. Robin Keller & Craig W. Kirkwood & Nancy S. Jones, 2010. "Assessing stakeholder evaluation concerns: An application to the Central Arizona water resources system," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 58-71, March.
    13. Robin Gregory & Baruch Fischhoff & Tim McDaniels, 2005. "Acceptable Input: Using Decision Analysis to Guide Public Policy Deliberations," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 4-16, March.
    14. Caffey, Rex H., 2003. "A Case For Subvention Of Private Landowners In The Louisiana Coastal Zone," 2003 Annual Meeting, February 1-5, 2003, Mobile, Alabama 35045, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    15. Luis Loures & Thomas Panagopoulos & Jon Bryan Burley, 2016. "Assessing user preferences on post-industrial redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(5), pages 871-892, September.
    16. Hao Fanghua & Chen Guanchun, 2010. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Model Based on Weighted Borda Scoring Method for Watershed Ecological Risk Management: a Case Study of Three Gorges Reservoir Area of China," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(10), pages 2139-2165, August.
    17. Scodanibbio, Lucia, 2011. "Opening a policy window for organisational change and full-cost accounting: The creation of BC Hydro's water use planning program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 1006-1015, March.
    18. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    19. Ciupuliga, A.R. & Cuppen, E., 2013. "The role of dialogue in fostering acceptance of transmission lines: the case of a France–Spain interconnection project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 224-233.
    20. Killemsetty, Namesh & Johnson, Michael & Patel, Amit, 2022. "Understanding housing preferences of slum dwellers in India: A community-based operations research approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(2), pages 699-713.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:inrace:201667. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inratfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.