IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v61y2018i14p2590-2612.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A critical assessment of employing democratic and deliberative ideals in the environmental planning process in Bangladesh

Author

Listed:
  • Anjan Kumer Dev Roy
  • Jeff Gow

Abstract

In the 6th (2011–15) and 7th (2016–20) Five Year Plans (FYP), Bangladesh's policy makers have set ambitious national environmental targets and goals to move the country towards more a sustainable economy and society. The goals were dictated by the economic, social and political interests of the political elites. This has resulted in limited stakeholder participation in environmental policy formulation. The 6th FYP aimed at achieving Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 7: ‘Ensure Environmental Sustainability’. It failed due to shortcomings in local implementation and due to a lack of community participation. The 7th FYP is based on the newly adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 13, 14, 15. The obvious paradox within Bangladesh's environmental planning is the big gap between central government's policy making and community participation and local government involvement. This paper examines environmental policy formulation, implementation and monitoring in the last two FYPs in Bangladesh. Contemporary deliberative democratic theory provides important theoretical and applied insights that are often unexamined in the environmental planning literature. A theoretical framework is developed to analyse to what degree environmental planning arrangements incorporated deliberative elements and how they contribute to decision-making. A case study of the environmental planning process tests its effectiveness in explaining observed outcomes. Elsewhere, deliberative democratic approaches have been central to the success of the environmental planning process. The central government's failure to apply this approach produced a policy gap. Plan targets cannot be met unless local participation is ensured through the deliberative framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Anjan Kumer Dev Roy & Jeff Gow, 2018. "A critical assessment of employing democratic and deliberative ideals in the environmental planning process in Bangladesh," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(14), pages 2590-2612, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:61:y:2018:i:14:p:2590-2612
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2017.1406341
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2017.1406341
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2017.1406341?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. Yizhong Huan & Xufeng Zhu, 2023. "Interactions among sustainable development goal 15 (life on land) and other sustainable development goals: Knowledge for identifying global conservation actions," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 321-333, February.
    2. Trishita Mondal & Wade W. Bowers & Md Hossen Ali, 2024. "Sustainable Management of Sundarbans: Stakeholder Attitudes Towards Participatory Management and Conservation of Mangrove Forests," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, July.
    3. Ali, Saleem H., 2020. "Environmental urgency versus the allure of RCT empiricism," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).

    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:61:y:2018:i:14:p:2590-2612. 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.