IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-99-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goals

Author

Listed:
  • Beierle, Thomas

Abstract

This paper presents a framework for evaluating mechanisms that involve the public in environmental decision-making. These include traditional participatory mechanisms--such as public hearings, notice and comment procedures, and advisory committees--as well as those considered more innovative--such as regulatory negotiations, mediations, and citizen juries. The framework is based on a set of "social goals," defined as those goals which are valued outcomes of a participatory process, but which transcend the immediate interests of any party in that process. The goals are: educating the public, incorporating public values and knowledge into decision-making, building trust, reducing conflict, and assuring cost-effective decision-making. The paper begins with a discussion of the need for an evaluative framework which 1) identifies the strengths and weaknesses of a number of different participatory mechanisms, 2) is "objective" in the sense of not taking the perspective of any one party to a decision, and 3) measures tangible outcomes. Section One presents the social goals framework as an approach for meeting these objectives. It illustrates how the framework can be applied to one case study in environmental decision-making: the performance of the Restoration Advisory Board at the Fort Ord military base in California. In Section Two, we contrast the social goals framework with two alternative approaches to evaluation, one based on participatory processes and one based on stakeholder interests. We find that, while useful for answering some questions about public involvement, these two approaches fail to meet all three objectives and may miss important information about the success of a particular participatory effort. In Section Three we take a closer look at participatory mechanisms and discusses how each is likely to perform against the various social goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Beierle, Thomas, 1998. "Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goals," RFF Working Paper Series dp-99-06, Resources for the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-99-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-99-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schneider, Mark & Teske, Paul & Marschall, Melissa & Mintrom, Michael & Roch, Christine, 1997. "Institutional Arrangements and the Creation of Social Capital: The Effects of Public School Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(1), pages 82-93, March.
    2. Wernstedt, Kris & Hersh, Robert, 1997. "Land Use and Remedy Selection: Experience from the Field - The Fort Ord Site," Discussion Papers 10847, Resources for the Future.
    3. Mazurek, Janice V. & Hersh, Robert, 1997. "Land Use and Remedy Selection: Experience from the Field - The Abex Site," Discussion Papers 10468, Resources for the Future.
    4. Frank N. Laird, 1989. "The Decline of Deference: The Political Context of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 543-550, December.
    5. Frances M. Lynn & George J. Busenberg, 1995. "Citizen Advisory Committees and Environmental Policy: What We Know, What's Left to Discover," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 147-162, April.
    6. Wernstedt, Kris & Hersh, Robert, 1997. "Land Use and Remedy Selection: Experience from the Field — The Fort Ord Site," RFF Working Paper Series dp-97-28, Resources for the Future.
    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. Hardev Kaur Latchimanan Singh, 2017. "Evaluating Public Participation Mechanisms in LA21 Programs in Malaysia," GATR Journals gjbssr482, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.
    2. Jacqueline M. Vadjunec & Nicole M. Colston & Todd D. Fagin & Austin L. Boardman & Brian Birchler, 2022. "Fostering Resilience and Adaptation to Drought in the Southern High Plains: Using Participatory Methods for More Robust Citizen Science," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Johanna Olsson & Lotta Andersson, 2007. "Possibilities and problems with the use of models as a communication tool in water resource management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(1), pages 97-110, January.
    4. Lu Feng & Qimei Wu & Weijun Wu & Wenjie Liao, 2020. "Decision-Maker-Oriented VS. Collaboration: China’s Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-24, February.
    5. S. Franceschini & G. Marletto, 2017. "The dynamics of social capital during public participation: new knowledge from an on-going monitoring," Working Paper CRENoS 201706, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    6. Axel Marx & Jan Wouters, 2011. "Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation: Conclusions and Implications," Chapters, in: David Vogel & Johan Swinnen (ed.), Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation, chapter 12, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Leslie Carnoye & Rita Lopes, 2015. "Participatory Environmental Valuation: A Comparative Analysis of Four Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-23, July.
    8. Asha Rajvanshi, 2003. "Promoting Public Participation for Integrating Sustainability Issues in Environmental Decision-Making: The Indian Experience," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 295-319.
    9. Nordström, Eva-Maria & Eriksson, Ljusk Ola & Öhman, Karin, 2010. "Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: Experience from a case study in northern Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 562-574, October.
    10. Carmona, Gema & Varela-Ortega, Consuelo & Bromley, John, 2011. "Participatory Modelling To Support Decision Making In Water Management. A Case Study In The Middle Guadiana Basin, Spain," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114320, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Langer, Katharina & Decker, Thomas & Menrad, Klaus, 2017. "Public participation in wind energy projects located in Germany: Which form of participation is the key to acceptance?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 63-73.
    12. Boley, B. Bynum & Maruyama, Naho & Woosnam, Kyle M., 2015. "Measuring empowerment in an eastern context: Findings from Japan," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 112-122.
    13. Garcia, Xavier & Benages-Albert, Marta & Vall-Casas, Pere, 2018. "Landscape conflict assessment based on a mixed methods analysis of qualitative PPGIS data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 112-124.
    14. Rastegar, Hamidreza, 2009. "Tourism Development and Residents' Attitude: A Case Study of Yazd, Iran," MPRA Paper 25325, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 26 Jan 2010.
    15. van den Hove, Sybille, 2000. "Participatory approaches to environmental policy-making: the European Commission Climate Policy Process as a case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 457-472, June.
    16. Charles C. Harris & Dennis R. Becker & Erik A. Nielsen & William J. Mclaughlin, 2014. "Public Deliberation About Salmon Restoration Impacts: Differences In The Input Of Citizens In Different Community Roles," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(04), pages 1-33.
    17. Sam Erevbenagie Usadolo & Marc Caldwel, 2016. "A Stakeholder Approach to Community Participation in a Rural Development Project," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(1), pages 21582440166, March.
    18. Nuno Videira & Paula Antunes & Rui Santos & Sofia Gamito, 2003. "Participatory Modelling in Environmental Decision-Making: The Ria Formosa Natural Park Case Study," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 421-447.
    19. Lia T. Vasconcelos & Flávia Z. Silva & Filipa G. Ferreira & Graça Martinho & Ana Pires & José Carlos Ferreira, 2022. "Collaborative process design for waste management: co-constructing strategies with stakeholders," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(7), pages 9243-9259, July.
    20. Timotijevic, Lada & Raats, Monique Maria, 2007. "Evaluation of two methods of deliberative participation of older people in food-policy development," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 302-319, August.

    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. Beierle, Thomas C., 1998. "Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goals," Discussion Papers 10497, Resources for the Future.
    2. Beierle, Thomas C., 2000. "The Quality of Stakeholder-Based Decisions: Lessons from the Case Study Record," Discussion Papers 10686, Resources for the Future.
    3. Beierle, Thomas, 2000. "The Quality of Stakeholder-Based Decisions: Lessons from the Case Study Record," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-56, Resources for the Future.
    4. Lauren M. McLaren & Vanessa A. Baird, 2006. "Of Time and Causality: A Simple Test of the Requirement of Social Capital in Making Democracy Work in Italy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(4), pages 889-897, December.
    5. Beierle, Thomas & Cayford, Jerrell, 2001. "Evaluating Dispute Resolution as an Approach to Public Participation," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-40, Resources for the Future.
    6. Caron Chess & Kandice L. Salomone & Billie Jo Hance & Alex Saville, 1995. "Results of a National Symposium on Risk Communication: Next Steps for Government Agencies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 115-125, April.
    7. Newton, Kenneth, 2005. "Support for democracy: Social capital, civil society and political performance," Discussion Papers, Research Group Civil Society, Citizenship and Political Mobilization in Europe SP IV 2005-402, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. 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.
    9. Beierle, Thomas C. & Cayford, Jerry, 2001. "Evaluating Dispute Resolution as an Approach to Public Participation," Discussion Papers 10899, Resources for the Future.
    10. David A. Freedman, 2009. "Limits of Econometrics," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 1(1), pages 5-17, April.
    11. Krishna, Anirudh, 2003. "Understanding, measuring and utilizing social capital: clarifying concepts and presenting a field application from India," CAPRi working papers 28, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Long, Zoe & Axsen, Jonn & Kitt, Shelby, 2020. "Public support for supply-focused transport policies: Vehicle emissions, low-carbon fuels, and ZEV sales standards in Canada and California," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 98-115.
    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. Royce A. Francis, 2015. "Elusive Critical Elements of Transformative Risk Assessment Practice and Interpretation: Is Alternatives Analysis the Next Step?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(11), pages 1983-1995, November.
    15. Mary Dengler, 2008. "Finding the Political ‘Sweet Spot’: Sectional Interests, Consensus Power, and the Everglades Restudy (1992–2000)," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(4), pages 766-784, April.
    16. Pronyk, Paul M. & Harpham, Trudy & Busza, Joanna & Phetla, Godfrey & Morison, Linda A. & Hargreaves, James R. & Kim, Julia C. & Watts, Charlotte H. & Porter, John D., 2008. "Can social capital be intentionally generated? A randomized trial from rural South Africa," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(10), pages 1559-1570, November.
    17. David Tàbara & David Saurí & Rufí Cerdan, 2003. "Forest Fire Risk Management and Public Participation in Changing Socioenvironmental Conditions: A Case Study in a Mediterranean Region," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 249-260, April.
    18. Narisong Huhe & Daniel Naurin & Robert Thomson, 2020. "Don’t cry for me Britannia: The resilience of the European Union to Brexit," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(1), pages 152-172, March.
    19. Poulsen, Anders & Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard, 2003. "Rise and Decline of Social Capital," Working Papers 03-10, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
    20. Christine H. Roch & Na Sai, 2015. "Nonprofit, For-Profit, or Stand-Alone? How Management Organizations Influence the Working Conditions in Charter Schools," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1380-1395, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-99-06. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.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.