IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v38y2006i6p1045-1059.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert Conceptualisations of the Role of Lay Knowledge in Environmental Decisionmaking: challenges for Deliberative Democracy

Author

Listed:
  • Judith Petts
  • Catherine Brooks

Abstract

The authors draw upon survey evidence of expert conceptualisations of the value of public knowledge in environmental decisionmaking. In the context of local air quality management in particular, they consider how experts understand the potential benefits of technological citizenship, and what status they accord to lay knowledge relative to their own roles. Evidence suggests a continuing expert-deficit model of lay knowledge, with suspicions that the public mis understand environmental issues. Although the need for public ‘buy-in’ to the solutions to problems such as air pollution is supported, this does not translate to a more proactive engagement of lay knowledge in the assessment of such issues. Experts seem to be personally challenged by such notions. The authors discuss the need for a cultural shift in expert understanding of the value of lay knowledge, supported by a move away from an oversimplification of the need for, and value of, public participation.

Suggested Citation

  • Judith Petts & Catherine Brooks, 2006. "Expert Conceptualisations of the Role of Lay Knowledge in Environmental Decisionmaking: challenges for Deliberative Democracy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(6), pages 1045-1059, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:38:y:2006:i:6:p:1045-1059
    DOI: 10.1068/a37373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a37373
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a37373?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. Robert P. Anex & Will Focht, 2002. "Public Participation in Life Cycle Assessment and Risk Assessment: A Shared Need," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5), pages 861-877, October.
    2. Peter Phillimore & Suzanne Moffatt, 2004. "‘If we have wrong perceptions of our area, we cannot be surprised if others do as well.’ Representing risk in Teesside's environmental politics," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 171-184, March.
    3. George E. Apostolakis & Susan E. Pickett, 1998. "Deliberation: Integrating Analytical Results into Environmental Decisions Involving Multiple Stakeholders," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 621-634, October.
    4. Timothy L. McDaniels & Robin S. Gregory & Daryl Fields, 1999. "Democratizing Risk Management: Successful Public Involvement in Local Water Management Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 497-510, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sally Eden & Christopher Bear, 2012. "The Good, the Bad, and the Hands-on: Constructs of Public Participation, Anglers, and Lay Management of Water Environments," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(5), pages 1200-1218, May.
    2. Anne Vogelpohl, 2019. "Global expertise, local convincing power: Management consultants and preserving the entrepreneurial city," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(1), pages 97-114, January.
    3. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. James P Evans, 2006. "Lost in Translation? Exploring the Interface between Local Environmental Research and Policymaking," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(3), pages 517-531, March.
    5. Anna Wesselink & Jouni Paavola & Oliver Fritsch & Ortwin Renn, 2011. "Rationales for Public Participation in Environmental Policy and Governance: Practitioners' Perspectives," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(11), pages 2688-2704, November.
    6. Lehoux, P. & Daudelin, G. & Abelson, J., 2012. "The unbearable lightness of citizens within public deliberation processes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(12), pages 1843-1850.
    7. Frédéric Vandermoere, 2008. "Hazard Perception, Risk Perception, and the Need for Decontamination by Residents Exposed to Soil Pollution: The Role of Sustainability and the Limits of Expert Knowledge," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 387-398, April.
    8. Frank van Kouwen & Card Dieperink & Paul P Schot & Martin J Wassen, 2009. "Computer-Supported Cognitive Mapping for Participatory Problem Structuring," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(1), pages 63-81, January.
    9. Martin J Wassen & Hens Runhaar & Aat Barendregt & Tomasz Okruszko, 2011. "Evaluating the Role of Participation in Modeling Studies for Environmental Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(2), pages 338-358, April.
    10. Sedlačko Michal & Staroňová Katarína, 2015. "An Overview of Discourses on Knowledge in Policy: Thinking Knowledge, Policy and Conflict Together," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 9(2), pages 10-31, December.
    11. J. Barnett & H. Cooper & V. Senior, 2007. "Belief in Public Efficacy, Trust, and Attitudes Toward Modern Genetic Science," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 921-933, August.
    12. Lowe, Philip & Phillipson, Jeremy & Proctor, Amy & Gkartzios, Menelaos, 2019. "Expertise in rural development: A conceptual and empirical analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 28-37.
    13. Baptiste Bedessem & Lucie Morère & Louise Roblin & Anne Dozières & Anne-Caroline Prévot, 2022. "Participatory Biodiversity Governance: A Comparison of Two French Initiatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Ksenia Koroleva & Jasminko Novak, 2020. "How to Engage with Sustainability Issues We Rarely Experience? A Gamification Model for Collective Awareness Platforms in Water-Related Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-24, January.
    15. HaeRan Shin, 2016. "Re-making a place-of-memory: The competition between representativeness and place-making knowledge in Gwangju, South Korea," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(16), pages 3566-3583, December.

    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. Thomas Webler & Seth Tuler, 2021. "Four Decades of Public Participation in Risk Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 503-518, March.
    2. Amanda P. Rehr & Mitchell J. Small & Paul S. Fischbeck & Patricia Bradley & William S. Fisher, 2014. "The role of scientific studies in building consensus in environmental decision making: a coral reef example," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 60-87, March.
    3. Francis, Royce & Bekera, Behailu, 2014. "A metric and frameworks for resilience analysis of engineered and infrastructure systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 90-103.
    4. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    5. Hua Li & George E. Apostolakis & Joseph Gifun & William VanSchalkwyk & Susan Leite & David Barber, 2009. "Ranking the Risks from Multiple Hazards in a Small Community," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 438-456, March.
    6. Kenneth C. Fletcher & Ali E. Abbas, 2018. "A Value Measure for Public‐Sector Enterprise Risk Management: A TSA Case Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 991-1008, May.
    7. Aimee Guglielmo Kinney & Thomas M. Leschine, 2002. "A Procedural Evaluation of an Analytic‐Deliberative Process: The Columbia River Comprehensive Impact Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 83-100, February.
    8. Davide, Di Fonzo & Alessandra, Fabri & Roberto, Pasetto, 2022. "Distributive justice in environmental health hazards from industrial contamination: A systematic review of national and near-national assessments of social inequalities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 297(C).
    9. Ellen R. K. Evers & Yoel Inbar & Irene Blanken & Linda D. Oosterwijk, 2017. "When Do People Prefer Carrots to Sticks? A Robust “Matching Effect” in Policy Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4261-4276, December.
    10. Ward, Frank A., 2023. "Innovations for the Water Resource Economics Curriculum: Training the Next Generation," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 5(3), September.
    11. Karydas, D.M. & Gifun, J.F., 2006. "A method for the efficient prioritization of infrastructure renewal projects," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 84-99.
    12. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    13. Shackley, Simon & Mander, Sarah & Reiche, Alexander, 2006. "Public perceptions of underground coal gasification in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3423-3433, December.
    14. Thomas P. Seager, 2008. "The sustainability spectrum and the sciences of sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(7), pages 444-453, November.
    15. Miguel Ángel López‐Navarro & Vicente Tortosa‐Edo & Jaume Llorens‐Monzonís, 2015. "Environmental Management Systems and Local Community Perceptions: the Case of Petrochemical Complexes Located in Ports," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 236-251, May.
    16. Joseph L. Arvai, 2003. "Using Risk Communication to Disclose the Outcome of a Participatory Decision‐Making Process: Effects on the Perceived Acceptability of Risk‐Policy Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 281-289, April.
    17. Richard O. Zerbe, 2013. "Ethical benefit–cost analysis as art and science: ten rules for benefit–cost analysis," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 8, pages 264-293, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Miguel Ángel López-Navarro & Jaume Llorens-Monzonís & Vicente Tortosa-Edo, 2013. "The Effect of Social Trust on Citizens’ Health Risk Perception in the Context of a Petrochemical Industrial Complex," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    19. Joseph Arvai & Kristianna Post, 2012. "Risk Management in a Developing Country Context: Improving Decisions About Point‐of‐Use Water Treatment Among the Rural Poor in Africa," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 67-80, January.
    20. Ward, Frank A., 2023. "Innovations for the Water Resource Economics Curriculum: Training the Next Generation," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 5(2), April.

    More about this item

    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:sae:envira:v:38:y:2006:i:6:p:1045-1059. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.