IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v89y2008i5p1212-1229.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol

Author

Listed:
  • E. Melanie DuPuis
  • Brian J. Gareau

Abstract

Objective. The turn to participatory, stakeholder modes of governance has been accompanied by the legitimization of a new “particularist knowledge regime” emphasizing the knowledge claims made by private interests and local voices. It has also tended to de‐legitimize the ways of knowing that had characterized central state governance, namely, state expertise based on general welfare analytics such as cost‐benefit analysis. This turn away from state expertise, what we call the “anti‐technocratic consensus,” while stemming from democratic motivations, may actually make environmental governance less democratic. Method. We examine the problems that arise from the abandonment of general welfare economic analytics and technical expertise—the anti‐technocratic consensus—through a specific case study: the recent handling of “critical use exemptions” to the ban on methyl bromide under the Montreal Protocol, a treaty that mandates the elimination of methyl bromide in order to protect the ozone layer. We show that decisionmakers specifically rejected general welfare analytics as a basis of regulatory action in favor of a particularist form of analytics based on measuring market disruption. Results. This case illustrate how the de‐legitimization of technical expertise can weaken the effectiveness of an environmental agreement in meeting its regulatory mandate. Critics have often criticized technical expertise as supporting the economic status quo. However, in the case of methyl bromide and the Montreal Protocol, technical experts using general welfare analytics represented a challenge to U.S. regulatory officials who supported industrial interests and their request for significant exemptions to the ban. Conclusion. The legitimization of a particularist knowledge regime opens up policy making to domination by private interests playing the stakeholder game. Stakeholder input and particularist knowledges are important to democratic decision making. However, technical expertise, despite all its weaknesses, is a form of knowledge that remains necessary to the protection of the environment and public health.

Suggested Citation

  • E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:89:y:2008:i:5:p:1212-1229
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2008.00576.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2008.00576.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2008.00576.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hahn, Robert W, 2000. "State and Federal Regulatory Reform: A Comparative Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 873-912, June.
    2. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, December.
    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. Wolverton Ann, 2014. "Retrospective evaluation of costs associated with methyl bromide critical use exemptions for open field strawberries in California," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-33, June.
    2. Brian J Gareau & E Melanie DuPuis, 2009. "From Public to Private Global Environmental Governance: Lessons from the Montreal Protocol's Stalled Methyl Bromide Phase-Out," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(10), pages 2305-2323, October.
    3. Kimitaka Nishitani & Munehiko Itoh, 2014. "Product Innovation in Response to Environmental Standards and Competitive Advantage: A Hedonic Analysis of Refrigerators in the Japanese Retail Market," Discussion Paper Series DP2014-30, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    4. Ekardt, Felix, 2009. "Welthandelsrecht und Sozialstaatlichkeit: Globalisierung und soziale Ungleichheit," Arbeitspapiere 170, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf.
    5. Brian Gareau, 2010. "A critical review of the successful CFC phase-out versus the delayed methyl bromide phase-out in the Montreal Protocol," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 209-231, September.
    6. Brian Gareau, 2015. "Lessons from the Montreal Protocol delay in phasing out methyl bromide," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(2), pages 163-168, June.
    7. Juliet Roper & Shiv Ganesh & Kerr Inkson, 2010. "Neoliberalism and knowledge interests in boundaryless careers discourse," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 24(4), pages 661-679, December.
    8. E. DuPuis & Sean Gillon, 2009. "Alternative modes of governance: organic as civic engagement," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(1), pages 43-56, March.

    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. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    2. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    3. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    4. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Davies-Colley, Christian & Smith, Willie, 2012. "Implementing environmental technologies in development situations: The example of ecological toilets," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-8.
    6. Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Moulaert & Jan Schreurs & Konrad Miciukiewicz, 2014. "Integrative Spatial Quality: A Relational Epistemology of Space and Transdisciplinarity in Urban Design and Planning," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 393-411, August.
    7. Füg, Franz & Ibert, Oliver, 2020. "Assembling social innovations in emergent professional communities. The case of learning region policies in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28(3), pages 541-562.
    8. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    9. Peter Munthe-Kaas, 2015. "Agonism and co-design of urban spaces," Urban Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 218-237, July.
    10. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Corianne Payton Scally & J. Rosie Tighe, 2015. "Democracy in Action?: NIMBY as Impediment to Equitable Affordable Housing Siting," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 749-769, July.
    12. Derk Jan Stobbelaar, 2020. "Impact of Student Interventions on Urban Greening Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    13. Patricia Molina Costa, 2014. "From plan to reality: Implementing a community vision in Jackson Square, Boston," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 293-310, September.
    14. Ratka ÄŒolić & Ä orÄ‘e Milić & Jasna Petrić & NataÅ¡a ÄŒolić, 2022. "Institutional capacity development within the national urban policy formation process – Participants’ views," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-89, February.
    15. Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    16. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    17. François Mancebo, 2017. "Sustainability Science in the Light of Urban Planning," Challenges in Sustainability, Librello publishing house, vol. 5(1), pages 26-34.
    18. Maie Kiisel, 2013. "Local Community Participation in the Planning Process: A Case of Bounded Communicative Rationality," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 232-250, February.
    19. Deborah F. Shmueli, 2017. "Community Plan Making in the Face of Ethnic Conflict in Israel: Lessons for Collaborative Planning Processes," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(2), pages 131-144, April.
    20. Peter Wilshusen, 2009. "Social process as everyday practice: the micro politics of community-based conservation and development in southeastern Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(2), pages 137-162, May.

    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:bla:socsci:v:89:y:2008:i:5:p:1212-1229. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    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.