Why Should the Public Participate in Environmental Decision-Making? Theoretical Arguments for Public Participation

Gabriella Kiss

doi:10.3311/ppso.7400

Abstract

In modern societies dealing with environmental issues has become a part of everyday life. Making decisions on waste- or water-related issues is part of the public discourse in Hungary as well. The Hungarian literature on public participation discusses different participatory tools applied in particular policy fields. Public participation seems to have greater significance in environmental decisions than any other kind of democratic decision making processes. These experiences raise the question of ‘why should the public participate in making environmental decisions?’ In this paper we are looking for the answers to this question analysing the literature on public participation and exploring the relevant theoretical approaches. Arguments based on democracy theories, communication theory, sustainability, environmental democracy, risk research and behavioural economics will be summarized. The paper presents an analysis of how these different theoretical approaches treat public participation in environmental decision making and what arguments they present for its justification.

Highlights

In modern societies dealing with environmental issues has become a part of everyday life
The Hungarian literature on public participation discusses different participatory tools applied in particular policy fields
Public participation seems to have greater significance in environmental decisions than any other kind of democratic decision making processes. These experiences raise the question of ‘why should the public participate in making environmental decisions?’ In this paper we are looking for the answers to this question analysing the literature on public participation and exploring the relevant theoretical arguments

Summary

Introduction

In modern societies dealing with environmental issues has become a part of everyday life. In a much cited article, Fiorino [13] expresses three arguments for why the public should participate in environmental decision making. He derived his arguments from democratic theory. An instrumental argument – he argues – is that effective lay participation in risk decisions makes them more legitimate and leads to better results. He denotes a substantive argument that lay judgments about risk are as sound, or – in some circumstances – more so, than those of experts. Non-experts see problems, issues, and solutions that experts might miss due to their disciplinary blind spots [13, p. 227-228]

Objectives

Conclusion