Governance of environmental risk: new approaches to managing stakeholder involvement

Disputes concerning industrial legacies such as the disposal of toxic wastes illustrate changing pressures on corporations and governments. Business and governments are now confronted with managing the expectations of a society increasingly aware of the social and environmental impacts and risks associated with economic development and demanding more equitable distribution and democratic management of such risks. The closed managerialist decision-making of the powerful bureaucracies and corporations of the industrial era is informed by traditional management theory which cannot provide a framework for the adequate governance of these risks. Recent socio-political theories have conceptualised some key themes that must be addressed in a more fitting approach to governance. We identify more recent management and governance theory which addresses these themes and develop a process-based approach to governance of environmental disputes that allows for the evolving nature of stakeholder relations in a highly complex multiple stakeholder arena.     

GIS, modeling, and politics: on the tensions of collaborative decision support

A tension exists at the heart of efforts to support collaboration with GIS. Many scholars and practitioners seek to support two separate objectives: (1) problem solving and (2) the exploration of diverse problem understandings. GIS applications designed for problem solving often pre-define the problem space by structuring the kind of information that can be considered or the way in which the problem is conceptualized. In doing so, they necessarily privilege particular perspectives and understandings of the problem while marginalizing others. As a result, these initiatives undermine their second objective. This is problematic in the context of contentious environmental decisions which have broad-reaching impacts on people with diverse perspectives and interests. In such contexts, I argue that equitable collaboration is impossible without first emphasizing the exploration of diverse problem understandings. I support this argument theoretically by turning to the literatures on collaborative planning and spatial decision support, and empirically in my analysis of a case study of an effort to construct a GIS for supporting collaborative water resource management in rural Idaho. Reflecting upon the case, I provide a set of recommendations to those seeking to better negotiate the tensions of supporting collaboration with GIS in the context of contentious environmental and natural resource decisions.     

Knowledge, data and interests: Challenges in participation of diverse stakeholders in HIA

Stakeholder participation is considered an integral part of HIA. However, the challenges that participation implies in a multi-disciplinary and multi-ethnic society are less studied. This paper presents the manifestations of the multiplicity of sectors and population groups in HIA and discusses the challenges that such diversity imposes. Specifically, there is no common ground between participants, as their positions entail contradictory knowledge regarding the current situation, reliance on distinct data and conflicting interests. This entails usage of multiple professional and ethnic languages, disagreements regarding the definition of health and prioritizing health issues in HIA, and divergent perceptions of risk. These differences between participants are embedded culturally, socially, individually and, maybe most importantly, professionally. This complex picture of diverse stakeholder attributes is grounded in a case study of stakeholder participation in HIA, regarding zoning of a hazardous industry site in Israel. The implication is that participatory HIAs should address the multiplicity of stakeholders and types of knowledge, data and interests in a more comprehensive way.     

Indicators for managing biosolids in Ireland

Sustainable development indicators (SDIs) have emerged as a tool to measure progress towards sustainable development for a number of fields. However, no indicator initiative to date has been aimed at biosolids management at local authority, regional or national levels. This paper presents a study where stakeholders involved in the management of biosolids in Ireland participated in the development of SDIs for managing biosolids at the local/regional level. A significant 81% of participating stakeholders find SDIs either 'useful' or 'very useful' as a tool for managing biosolids. A suite of 22 indicators has been developed and arranged according to the driving force-pressure-state-impact-response (DPSIR) indicator framework. The indicators address all the domains of biosolids management namely, production, quality, cost, legislation/regulation, training/research and recycling/disposal. The stakeholder approach is recognition that no effective indicator set can be developed without the input of stakeholders.