IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v47y2004i1p3-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exclusion: the necessary difference between ideal and practical consensus

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Connelly
  • Tim Richardson

Abstract

Consensus building has become an everyday activity in environmental planning and management, and its use is often held to be a symbol of a fair, transparent and fully participative process. However, this paper argues that in any real situation practical constraints and tensions between different goals lead almost inevitably to compromises in the ideals of inclusivity and non-coercion. This gap between ideal and practical consensus is opened by a range of practices which exclude potential participants, interests, issues, actions and/or substantive outcomes. The paper contends that insufficient attention is paid by practitioners and researchers to these shifts, which are often confused or masked by a rhetoric of ideal consensus. It is concluded that practitioners need to reflect critically on these questions of exclusion, so that the necessary but difficult judgements involved in designing practical consensus building processes can be made transparently, and in ways which do not undermine the processes' legitimacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Connelly & Tim Richardson, 2004. "Exclusion: the necessary difference between ideal and practical consensus," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(1), pages 3-17.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:47:y:2004:i:1:p:3-17
    DOI: 10.1080/0964056042000189772
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0964056042000189772
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0964056042000189772?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tayyebi, Amin & Arsanjani, Jamal J. & Tayyebi, Amir H. & Omrani, Hichem & Moghadam, Hossein S., 2016. "Group-based crop change planning: Application of SmartScape™ spatial decision support system for resolving conflicts," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 333(C), pages 92-100.
    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. Tornberg, Patrik & Odhage, John, 2018. "Making transport planning more collaborative? The case of Strategic Choice of Measures in Swedish transport planning," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 416-429.
    4. Xue, Jin, 2014. "Is eco-village/urban village the future of a degrowth society? An urban planner's perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 130-138.
    5. Hrelja, Robert, 2015. "Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-13.
    6. Freire-Gibb, Lucio Carlos & Koss, Rebecca & Margonski, Piotr & Papadopoulou, Nadia, 2014. "Governance strengths and weaknesses to implement the marine strategy framework directive in European waters," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 172-178.
    7. Steve Connelly, 2011. "Constructing Legitimacy in the New Community Governance," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(5), pages 929-946, April.
    8. Sofia Eckersten & Berit Balfors & Ulrika Gunnarsson-Östling, 2021. "Challenges and Opportunities in Early Stage Planning of Transport Infrastructure Projects: Environmental Aspects in the Strategic Choice of Measures Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, January.
    9. Richard Cowell & Susan Owens, 2006. "Governing Space: Planning Reform and the Politics of Sustainability," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(3), pages 403-421, June.
    10. Kristian Olesen, 2012. "Soft Spaces as Vehicles for Neoliberal Transformations of Strategic Spatial Planning?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(5), pages 910-923, October.
    11. Louise Krog & Karl Sperling & Henrik Lund, 2018. "Barriers and Recommendations to Innovative Ownership Models for Wind Power," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, September.

    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:taf:jenpmg:v:47:y:2004:i:1:p:3-17. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.