IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v40y2007i2p79-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The discourse of democracy in Canadian nuclear waste management policy

Author

Listed:
  • Genevieve Johnson

Abstract

Canadian nuclear waste management policy has taken a deliberative democratic turn. What explains this turn? What is its significance? What lessons does it teach us? I trace a narrative of a powerful discursive coalition that was able to take advantage of institutional and financial opportunities to advance deliberative democratic decision making. I identify limitations in this turn by evaluating the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s subsequent consultation process against the criteria of inclusion, equality, reciprocity, agreement, and integration. Despite impressive deliberative democratic designs, the process falls short of each criterion. This analysis clarifies the relative importance of actors to coalitions and institutions. Even with a strong coalition and favorable institutional context, realizing deliberative democracy is contingent on the will of involved actors. This conclusion has implications for the theory and practice of deliberative democracy. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLP 2007

Suggested Citation

  • Genevieve Johnson, 2007. "The discourse of democracy in Canadian nuclear waste management policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(2), pages 79-99, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:40:y:2007:i:2:p:79-99
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-007-9032-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11077-007-9032-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-007-9032-0?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pedro Solbes Mira, 2001. "Interview," Revue d'Économie Financière, Programme National Persée, vol. 6(1), pages 29-37.
    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. Ryane Straus, 2011. "Citizens’ use of policy symbols and frames," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(1), pages 13-34, March.
    2. Ramana, M.V., 2013. "Shifting strategies and precarious progress: Nuclear waste management in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 196-206.
    3. Nguyen, Sun V. & Langston, Nancy & Wellstead, Adam & Howlett, Michael, 2020. "Mining the evidence: Public comments and evidence-based policymaking in the controversial Minnesota PolyMet mining project," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    4. Alex Sager & Alex Zakaras, 2014. "The Hanford Advisory Board: participatory democracy, technology, and representation," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 4(2), pages 142-155, June.
    5. Adam Thorn, 2018. "Issue definition and conflict expansion: the role of risk to human health as an issue definition strategy in an environmental conflict," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(1), pages 59-76, March.
    6. Jason Chilvers & Jacquelin Burgess, 2008. "Power Relations: The Politics of Risk and Procedure in Nuclear Waste Governance," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(8), pages 1881-1900, August.

    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.

      More about this item

      Keywords

      ;
      ;
      ;
      ;
      ;

      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:kap:policy:v:40:y:2007:i:2:p:79-99. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

      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.