IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijgenv/v3y2003i2p133-148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public participation in environmental decisions: stakeholders, authorities and procedural justice

Author

Listed:
  • Lynn A. Maguire
  • E. Allan Lind

Abstract

We analysed a stakeholder participation process undertaken by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality to see if the process satisfied elements of procedural justice: representation of relevant parties, voice, sound technical basis, fair treatment by authorities and absence of bias. The rushed timeframe for the process compromised several elements of procedural justice. Representation suffered from the absence of pre-process contact with potential participants. Too frequent meetings prevented stakeholders from digesting complex technical information on water quality impacts of excess nutrients. The Division of Water Quality dominated the function of the stakeholder groups by playing multiple roles, including convening meetings, providing technical information, drafting documents, and serving as liaison to the state legislature. Stakeholders acknowledged that the division's strong role was probably essential to making progress in such a short timeframe but worried that the result was biased in favour of division views.

Suggested Citation

  • Lynn A. Maguire & E. Allan Lind, 2003. "Public participation in environmental decisions: stakeholders, authorities and procedural justice," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(2), pages 133-148.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijgenv:v:3:y:2003:i:2:p:133-148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=3861
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    2. Clement, Floriane & Suhardiman, Diana & Bharati, Luna, "undated". "IWRM Discourses, Institutional Holy Grail and Water Justice in Nepal," Papers published in Journals (Open Access) H048330, International Water Management Institute.
    3. Deserai A Crow & Elizabeth A Albright & Elizabeth Koebele, 2016. "Environmental rulemaking across states: Process, procedural access, and regulatory influence," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1222-1240, November.
    4. Berthomé, Guy-El-Karim & Thomas, Alban, 2017. "A Context-based Procedure for Assessing Participatory Schemes in Environmental Planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 113-123.
    5. Zilliox, Skylar & Smith, Jessica M., 2017. "Memorandums of understanding and public trust in local government for Colorado's unconventional energy industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 72-81.
    6. Maria Busse & Nico Heitepriem & Rosemarie Siebert, 2019. "The Acceptability of Land Pools for the Sustainable Revalorisation of Wetland Meadows in the Spreewald Region, Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).

    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:ids:ijgenv:v:3:y:2003:i:2:p:133-148. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=14 .

    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.