Moving from misinformation derived from public attitude surveys on carbon dioxide capture and storage towards realistic stakeholder involvement

Stakeholder involvement (SI) can include many activities, from providing information on a website to one-on-one conversations with people confronting an issue in their community. For carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS), there are now quite a few surveys of public attitudes towards CCS that are being used to inform the design of SI efforts. These surveys, focused on the nascent commercial deployment of CCS technologies, have demonstrated that the general public has little knowledge about CCS—yet the surveys go on to collect what are known as “pseudo opinions” or “non-attitudes” of respondents who know little or nothing about CCS. Beyond establishing the lack of knowledge about CCS, the results of these surveys should not be relied upon by the larger CCS community and public and private decision makers to inform the critical task of implementing and executing SI activities. The paper discusses the issues involved in providing information as part of the survey, maintaining that such information is never unbiased and thus tends to produce pseudo opinions that reflect the pollster's or researcher's bias. Other content and methodological issues are discussed, leading to the conclusion that most of the survey results should be used neither as a gauge of public attitudes nor as an indication of public acceptance. Then the framing of SI in CCS is examined, including the assumptions that clear stakeholder acceptance is a realistic goal and that the public has a decisive say in choosing the energy technologies of the present and the future. Finally, a broader suite of SI activities is recommended as more suited to realistic and contextual goals.     

Taming the Unruly Side of Ethics: Overcoming Challenges of a Bottom-Up Approach to Ethics in the Areas of Food Policy and Climate Change

Here, I investigate the challenges involved in addressing ethical questions related to food policy, food security, and climate change in a public engagement atmosphere where “experts” (e.g., scientists and scholars), policy-makers and laypersons interact. My focus is on the intersection between food and climate in the state of Alaska, located in the circumpolar north. The intersection of food security and climate represents a “wicked problem.” This wicked problem is plagued by “unruliness,” characterized by disruptive mechanisms that can impede how ethical issues in policy-making are broached. Unruliness is exacerbated by conditions of engagement that can be characterized as occurring in a “fog.” In this fog, interlocutors encounter both moral and epistemological conundrums. In considering how to mitigate unruliness, a bottom-up approach is recommended. I discuss “taming” strategies for addressing these ethical concerns; modest suggestions on what should be taken into count when confronting issues of science and ethics within the context of promoting greater deliberative discourse regarding food security issues at more local levels. My recommendations are made in light of developments in food policy in Alaska and may be instructive for other regions pursuing cold climate agricultural expansion, for example.     

Food Citizenship: Is There a Duty for Responsible Consumption?

Labeling of food consumption is related to food safety, food quality, environmental, safety, and social concerns. Future politics of food will be based on a redefinition of commodity food consumption as an expression of citizenship. “Citizen-consumers” realize that they could use their buying power in order to develop a new terrain of social agency and political action. It takes for granted kinds of moral selfhood in which human responsibility is bound into human agency based on knowledge and recognition. This requires new kinds of food labeling practices. Existing research on consumer’s preferences often fails to recognize the full complexity of the motivations and intentions through which the identity of the moral self is built up in relation to food consumption practices. For citizens, not only food production practices matter but also the impact of what we eat on who we are and the ecological foot print of our food stuff. Two major drivers for this are the idea that we ourselves have to take care of our own bodies (“We are what we eat”) and that we are responsible for Planet Earth. Since both obesity and climate change have become major public concerns, also governments develop an increasing interest in defining how citizens ought to behave as consumers and how retailers and producers should facilitate such responsible behavior. Since they are supposed to defend the “bonum commune,” e.g., the public health of their citizens and a sound common future for all, a new consensus on “appropriate” consumption choices has to be found, balancing beneficence and autonomy.     

Bird's‐eye view of the environmental attitude types in the sustainable consumption context

Environmental attitudes are considered to be important factors that influence sustainable consumption. Typically, attitudes fall into two main types: a general environmental attitude (GEA) and a specific environmental attitude (SEA). This study found that the effect of the SEA is stronger than the GEA in regard to sustainable consumption behavior. Also, when analyzing the purchasing behavior of green products, the SEA is a more appropriate and consistent predictor of behavior than the GEA. The study suggests a more operationalized and salient definition of the intended meaning of the term “environmental attitude,” and also advises researchers and marketing professionals to use a framework that contains both types of environmental attitudes in order to better understand what drives the attitude–behavior gap in green consumer behavior.     

Beyond “Second Animals”: Making Sense of Plant Ethics

Concern for what we do to plants is pivotal for the field of environmental ethics but has scarcely been voiced. This paper examines how plant ethics first emerged from the development of plant science and yet also hit theoretical barriers in that domain. It elaborates on a case study prompted by a legal article on “the dignity of creatures” in the Swiss Constitution. Interestingly, the issue of plant dignity was interpreted as a personification or rather an “animalization of plants.” This sense of irony makes sense when one realizes that on scientific grounds the plant is a “second animal,” i.e., it differs from the animal in degree of life or some ethically-relevant criterion but not in nature. From the point of view of ethics however, plants should be defended for what they are by nature and not by comparison to external references: the ethical standing of plants cannot be indexed to animals. It is thus reckoned that to circumvent this odd fetishism, the plant ethics can only be adequately addressed by changing the theory of plant science. Common sense tells us this: plants and animals belong to radically different fields of perception and experience, a difference that is commonly captured by the notion of kingdom. In this paper we remind the ethical conversation that plants are actually incommensurable with animals because they are unsplit beings (having neither inside nor outside), i.e., they live as “non-topos” in an undivided, unlimited, non-centered state of being. It is concluded that the unique ontology of plants can only be addressed through a major change from object-thinking to process-thinking and a move from ego-centric to “peri-ego” ethics.     

Whom to Trust? Public Concerns, Late Modern Risks, and Expert Trustworthiness

This article discusses the conditions under which the use of expert knowledge may provide an adequate response to public concerns about high-tech, late modern risks. Scientific risk estimation has more than once led to expert controversies. When these controversies occur, the public at large – as a media audience – faces a paradoxical situation: on the one hand it must rely on the expertise of scientists as represented in the mass media, but on the other it is confused by competing expert claims in the absence of any clear-cut standard to judge these claims. The question then arises, what expertise can the public trust? I argue that expert controversies cannot be settled by appealing to neutral, impartial expertise, because each use of expert knowledge in applied contexts is inextricably bound up with normative and evaluative assumptions. This value-laden nature of expert contributions, however, does not necessarily force us to adopt a relativist conception of expert knowledge. Nor does it imply active involvement of ordinary citizens in scientific risk estimation – as some authors seem to suggest. The value-laden, or partisan, nature of expert statements rather requires an unbiased process of expert dispute in which experts and counter-experts can participate. Moreover, instead of being a reason for discrediting expert contributions, experts' commitment may enhance public trustworthiness because it enlarges the scope of perspectives taken into account, to include public concerns. Experts who share the same worries as (some of) the public could be expected to voice these worries at the level of expert dispute. Thus, a broadly shaped expert dispute, that is accessible to both proponents and opponents, is a prerequisite for public trust.     

Facing Animals: A Relational,Other-Oriented Approach to Moral Standing

In this essay we reflect critically on how animal ethics, and in particular thinking about moral standing, is currently configured. Starting from the work of two influential “analytic” thinkers in this field, Peter Singer and Tom Regan, we examine some basic assumptions shared by these positions and demonstrate their conceptual failings—ones that have, despite efforts to the contrary, the general effect of marginalizing and excluding others. Inspired by the so-called “continental” philosophical tradition (in particular Emmanuel Levinas, Martin Heidegger, and Jacques Derrida), we then argue that what is needed is a change in the rules of the game, a change of the question. We alter the (pre-) normative question from “What properties does the animal have?” to “What are the conditions under which an entity becomes a moral subject?” This leads us to consider the role of language, personal relations, and material-technological contexts. What is needed then in response to the moral standing problem, is not more of the same—yet another, more refined criterion and argumentation concerning moral standing, or a “final” rational argumentation that would be able to settle the animal question once and for all—but a turning or transformation in both our thinking about and our relations to animals, through language, through technology, and through the various place-ordering practices in which we participate.     

Journalism and Science: How to Erode the Idea of Knowledge

This paper discusses aspects of the relationship between the scientific community and the public at large. Inspired by the European public debate on genetically modified crops and food, ethical challenges to the scientific community are highlighted. This is done by a discussion of changes that are likely to occur to journalistic attitudes – mirroring changing attitudes in the wider society – towards science and scientific researchers. Two journalistic conventions – those of science transmission and of investigative journalism – are presented and discussed in relation to the present drive towards commercialization within the world of science: how are journalists from these different schools of thought likely to respond to the trend of commercialization? Likely journalistic reactions could, while maintaining the authority of the scientific method, be expected to undermine public trust in scientists. In the long term, this may lead to an erosion of the idea of knowledge as something that cannot simply be reduced to the outcome of negotiation between stakeholders. It is argued that science is likely to be depicted as a fallen angel. This may be countered, it is posited, by science turning human, by recognizing its membership of society, and by recognizing that such membership entails more than just commercial relations. To rethink its relationship with the public at large – and, in particular, to rethink the ideal of disinterested science – is an ethical challenge facing the scientific community.     

Misunderstanding the “Nature” of Co-Management: A Geography of Regulatory Science and Indigenous Knowledges (IK)

Governments, NGOs, and natural scientists have increased research and policy-making collaborations with Indigenous peoples for governing natural resources, including official co-management regimes. However, there is continuing dissatisfaction with such collaborations, and calls for better communication and mutual learning to create more “adaptive” co-management regimes. This, however, requires that both Western and Indigenous knowledge systems be equal participants in the “co-production” of regulatory data. In this article, I examine the power dynamics of one co-management regulatory regime, conducting a multi-sited ethnography of the practices of researching and managing one transnational migratory species, greater white-fronted geese (Anser albifrons frontalis), who nest where Koyukon Athabascans in Alaska, USA, practice subsistence. Analyzing the ethnographic data through the literatures of critical geography, science studies and Indigenous Studies, I describe how the practice of researching for co-management can produce conflict. “Scaling” the data for the co-management regime can marginalize Indigenous understandings of human–environment relations. While Enlightenment-based practices in wildlife biology avoid “anthropomorphism,” Indigenous Studies describes identities that operate through non-modern, deeply imbricated human–nonhuman identities that do not separate “nature” and “society” in making knowledge. Thus, misunderstanding the “nature” of their collaborations causes biologists and managers to measure and research the system in ways that erase how subsistence-based Indigenous groups already “manage” wildlife: by living through their ethical commitments to their fellow beings. At the end of the article, I discuss how managers might learn from these ontological and epistemological differences to better “co-produce” data for co-management.     

Elderly Adi Women of Arunachal Pradesh: “Living Encyclopedias” and Cultural Refugia in Biodiversity Conservation of the Eastern Himalaya, India

Elderly women of a particular socioecological system are considered to be “living encyclopedias” in biocultural knowledge systems. These women play a pivotal role in retaining and passing on biodiversity-related traditional knowledge to the next generations. Unfortunately the fast changing sociocultural values and the impact of modernity have rendered their knowledge somewhat less valuable and they are being treated as “cultural refugia.” Our study on the importance of these women in the conservation of indigenous biodiversity was conducted in 14 randomly selected villages dominated by the Adi tribe of East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh (northeast India). Data were collected from 531 women (381 elderly and 150 young to middle aged) during 2003–2008 using conventional social science methods and participatory rural appraisal. One innovative method, namely “recipe contest,” was devised to mobilize Adi women of each village in order to energies them and explore their knowledge relating to traditional foods, ethnomedicines, and conservation of indigenous biodiversity. Results indicated that 55 plant species are being used by elderly Adi women in their food systems, while 34 plant species are integral parts of ethnomedicinal practices. These women identified different plant species found under multistory canopies of community forests. Elderly women were particularly skilled in preparing traditional foods including beverages and held significantly greater knowledge of indigenous plants than younger women. Lifelong experiences and cultural diversity were found to influence the significance of biodiversity use and conservation. The conservation of biodiversity occurs in three different habitats: jhum lands (shifting cultivation), Morang forest (community managed forests), and home gardens. The knowledge and practice of elderly women about habitats and multistory vegetations, regenerative techniques, selective harvesting, and cultivation practices contribute significantly to food and livelihood security while sustaining an array of threatened plant species. Basically, knowledge of elderly women on using biodiversity in food and medicinal systems was found in three categories namely: “individual,” “community,” and “refined.” We identified a need to develop holistic policies to recognize and integrate knowledge and practices of elderly women with local level of planning on sustainable conservation of biodiversity as well as community-based adaptations.     

Social Acceptability of Water Resource Management: A Conceptual Approach and Empirical Findings from Portland,Oregon1

Abstract: Surface water resources in urban areas serve multiple functions ranging from recreation to wildlife habitat. As a result, diverse values influence people’s views about resource protection, potentially leading to conflicting interests. In metropolitan Portland, Oregon, natural resource planning has recently focused on habitat restoration as well as stormwater and pollution mitigation, especially through the protection of riparian areas. Due to opposition over proposed regulations in the study region, this research examines public attitudes about an array of resource management efforts. The primary research question is: what is the extent of positive–negative attitudes about water resource protection, and what theoretical dimensions underlie diverse judgments? After empirical survey results are presented, I outline a conceptual approach for future assessments of environmental attitudes while highlighting important value‐based dimensions of judgments. Although flexible, the framework allows broad comparisons to advance knowledge about the social acceptability of varied water resource management approaches across diverse places and contexts.     

The Ways of Wickedness: Analyzing Messiness with Messy Tools

The revelatory paper, “Dilemmas in the General Theory of Planning,” by Rittel and Webber (Policy Sci 4:155–169, 1973) has had great impact because it provides one example of an emergent consensus across many disciplines. Many “problems,” as addressed in real-world situations, involve elements that exceed the complexity of any known or hoped-for model, or are “wicked.” Many who encounter this work for the first time find that their concept of wicked problems aptly describes many environmental disputes. For those frustrated with the lack of progress in many areas of environmental protection, Rittel and Webber’s work suggested a powerful explanatory hypothesis: Complex environmental problems cannot be comprehended within any of the accepted disciplinary models available in the academy or in discourses on public interest and policy. What should we conclude about the future of social improvements, and about the possibilities for rational discourse leading to cooperative action, with respect to this huge number of pressing public, environmental problems? Can we find ways to address environmental problems that improves the ability of communities to respond creatively and rationally to them? I will argue that, while the Rittel-Webber critique requires us to abandon many of the assumptions associated with a positivistic view of science and its applications to policy analysis, it also points to a more productive direction for the future of policy analysis. I will introduce “boundary critique,” developed within Critical Systems Theory (CST), an approach that offers some reason for optimism in dealing with some aspects of wickedness.     

Knowledge,agency and collective action as barriers to energy-saving behaviour

Energy saving is becoming a rising priority as a response to climate change and fossil fuel depletion in recent years. However, despite energy-related behaviour change being an important part of many environmental education initiatives, “energy literacy” among citizens remains patchy in both the USA and the UK, with evidence of strong positive attitudes but less consistent knowledge. Whilst it is clear that increasing knowledge does not automatically produce behaviour changes, potential questions must be asked about the logic of focusing solely on behaviour without simultaneously exploring and enhancing understanding of energy issues. This research, undertaken at a higher education institution with a strong focus on sustainability, illustrates the potential risks of targeting behaviour change and individual action at the expense of increasing knowledge, or encouraging collaborative and democratic endeavours. Results from an online survey indicate widespread misconceptions about energy which may reduce the effectiveness of energy-saving behaviours, alongside variable levels of motivation and engagement with energy issues. Respondents report a strong belief in the efficacy of personal changes, yet uncertainty about their capacity to influence business and government alongside a persistent faith in science to provide solutions to energy issues. The paper concludes by reflecting on the challenges arising from these findings for understanding agency and effectiveness in energy relationships.     

Making environmental policy work with civic science: the intermediary role of expert citizens at the Japanese local level

The aim of the present article is to examine the importance of public participation in the production and use of environmental science, with special reference to “expert citizens” who can facilitate and mediate between expert knowledge and lay people. The study of expert citizens is largely unexplored in Japan's environmental policy. As uncertainty, inherent in the complexity of environmental science, increases, there are calls for refashioning expert knowledge into a more citizen–expert interactive governance. In the USA, the way that lay people can participate in scientific knowledge application and policy-making is organised through grassroots and national environmental organisations, such as the National Resources Defense Council. In Japan, such professional associations that build networks of interaction with scientific experts, policy-makers, interest groups and the media, have yet to emerge on a wider scale. Nonetheless, voluntary citizens individually or collectively have developed their expertise over many years and have begun to play an intermediary role at the local level. This article will analyse the potential roles of expert citizens by conducting the case studies of two Japanese localities, Shiki and Joyo cities.     

ENERGY,ENVIRONMENTAL, AND ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF SOME RECENT ALBERTA WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS1

ABSTRACT: Most of us are aware, or feel we are aware, of the impacts of major water resources projects on our lives. “Dam-lovers” note the life-saving flood-risk reduction and recreational benefits of a proposed reservoir, while “dam-haters” bemoan the future drowning out of the wildlife habitat of its river valley, and the recreational disbenefits to stream (as opposed to lake) fishermen. Water supply projects can often be given such a revered status, assuming the “obvious” tenet that water, air, food, and shelter are basic requirements of decent living, that the economic viability of the project may not even be assessed. Water resources planners are supposed to impartially weigh the environmental and economic benefits, and especially now, the energy implications of all proposed water projects, but many times the partial views of political or public advocates may be hard to ignore. The assumptions used in the planning of four recent water projects in the Province of Alberta will be presented and some revisions suggested which materially affect their Benefit/Cost ratios. In one project that is still in the public hearing stage, the economic analysis will be revealed, indicating that the original B/C ratio of about 1.6:1 might be more realistically placed at 0.6:1. In another project just completed, the apparent lack of an economic or energy analysis that has resulted in a perpetual and unnecessary energy load on the province, will be described.     

Urban agriculture,civil interfaces and moving beyond difference: the experiences of plot holders in Dublin and Belfast

Recent literature suggests that a “shared politics of place” attained through joint activities fosters social integration and provides people with a means to practise co-operation [Baumann, G., 1996. Contesting culture: discourses of identity in multi-ethnic London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Sanjek, R., 1998. The future of us all: race & neighbourhood policies in New York City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; Sennett, R., 2012. Together: the rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. UK: Penguin]. Such a “shared politics of place” is most likely to occur in the context of public space conceptualised broadly as “the setting for everyday spatial behaviour of individuals and communities, emphasizing ordinary activities of citizens” [Lownsbrough, H. and Beunderman, J., 2007. Equally spaced? Public space and interaction between diverse communities. London: Demos, p. 8]. Here we explore one element of such public space – urban agriculture sites – with a view to identifying the extent to which a “shared politics of place” can be created and nurtured among the cultivating citizenry. The paper draws on data collected on allotment gardening sites in two urban contexts: Dublin (Ireland) and Belfast (Northern Ireland) over the period 2009–2013. We demonstrate the centrality of allotment cultivation to the generation of solidarity, mutuality and trust among participating citizens. Individuals engaging in allotment gardening in both Dublin and Belfast create and sustain civil interfaces – dismantling barriers, exchanging knowledge, challenging stereotypes, generating empathy and getting on with the business of simply getting on with their lives. The modus operandi of allotment gardening is predicated on a willingness to disregard social and ethno-national categorisations while on site. This is not to deny that such differences exist and persist, but allotments offer a “space of potential” where those differences are, at least for a time, rendered less salient.     

Food System Fragility and Resilience in the Aftermath of Disruption and Controversy

Discussions about “disruptive” food controversies abound in popular and academic literatures, particularly with respect to meat production and consumption, yet there is little scholarship examining what makes an event disruptive in the first instance. Filling this gap will improve our understanding of how food controversies unfold and why certain issues may be more likely to linger in the public consciousness as opposed to others. I address these questions by using focus groups and in-depth interviews to analyze five potentially upsetting topics: dietary warnings about meat consumption, meat safety recalls, eating meat directly from the skull of the animal, the morality of killing animals for food, and the “pink slime” debate. Findings suggest that disruptive events involve negative affective reactions to safety hazards, disgust-provoking sensory cues, and/or ethical dilemmas. When these cues exist in isolation from one another, consumers’ reactions are quite often short-lived, while the simultaneous presence of multiple disruptive elements in the context of a single issue or event can trigger a far stronger reaction.     

Environmentalism and Public Virtue

Much of the literature addressing environmental virtue tends to focus on what might be called “personal virtue”—individual actions, characteristics, or dispositions that benefit the individual actor. There has, in contrast, been relatively little interest in either “virtue politics”—collective actions, characteristics, or dispositions—or in what might be called “public virtues,” actions, characteristics, or dispositions that benefit the community rather than the individual. This focus, however, is problematic, especially in a society that valorizes individuality. This paper examines public virtue and its role in environmental virtue ethics. First, I outline different types of virtue in order to frame the discussion of public virtues and, in particular, a subclass of virtues I will refer to as political virtue. Second, I focus on practical problems and address the inadequacy of personal virtue for effecting social change and, therefore, for addressing most environmental crises. Finally, I argue that public and political virtues are necessary, if under emphasized, conditions for the flourishing of the individual, and that they are important complements to more traditional environmental virtues.     

DAD IS OUT,POP IS IN1

ABSTRACT: Two major challenges face today's water professionals. The first is finding solutions to increasingly complicated water resources problems. The second challenge is nontechnical. It is effective interaction with the public recognizing both the public's increasingly elevated goals relative to water and the public's growing understanding of water science and technology. The traditional DAD approach, that is, decide-announce-defend, is no longer appropriate. The much more progressive, and inclusive POP approach, that is, public owns project, is more likely to be effective given the changing nature of the public's expectations and knowledge. A water resources planning or design effort that fails to include a public interaction program plans to fail. Described in this paper are three suggested objectives of the POP approach, namely demonstrating awareness, gathering supplemental data and information, and building a base of support. Having established specific objectives for a particular water resources project, appropriate public interaction programs and events must be selected, scheduled, and implemented. Many and varied programs and events are described in the paper.     

Advancing Sustainable Bioenergy: Evolving Stakeholder Interests and the Relevance of Research

The sustainability of future bioenergy production rests on more than continual improvements in its environmental, economic, and social impacts. The emergence of new biomass feedstocks, an expanding array of conversion pathways, and expected increases in overall bioenergy production are connecting diverse technical, social, and policy communities. These stakeholder groups have different—and potentially conflicting—values and cultures, and therefore different goals and decision making processes. Our aim is to discuss the implications of this diversity for bioenergy researchers. The paper begins with a discussion of bioenergy stakeholder groups and their varied interests, and illustrates how this diversity complicates efforts to define and promote “sustainable” bioenergy production. We then discuss what this diversity means for research practice. Researchers, we note, should be aware of stakeholder values, information needs, and the factors affecting stakeholder decision making if the knowledge they generate is to reach its widest potential use. We point out how stakeholder participation in research can increase the relevance of its products, and argue that stakeholder values should inform research questions and the choice of analytical assumptions. Finally, we make the case that additional natural science and technical research alone will not advance sustainable bioenergy production, and that important research gaps relate to understanding stakeholder decision making and the need, from a broader social science perspective, to develop processes to identify and accommodate different value systems. While sustainability requires more than improved scientific and technical understanding, the need to understand stakeholder values and manage diversity presents important research opportunities.