IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v40y2008i4p766-784.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Finding the Political ‘Sweet Spot’: Sectional Interests, Consensus Power, and the Everglades Restudy (1992–2000)

Author

Listed:
  • Mary Dengler

    (Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, England)

Abstract

Collaborative decision making and management frequently encompass a diverse range of scenarios. The author explores a specific mechanism of collaboration: the inclusion of competing sectional interests in an ad hoc organization with consensus governance rules to influence an ongoing planning process. Drawing from an empirical study of the Everglades Restudy process (1992–2000), the author analyzes how and why the Governor's Commission for a Sustainable South Florida offered planners and US Congress the sociopolitically acceptable conceptual framing for a multipurpose water management plan. Inclusion of legitimate representatives from powerful sectional interests, consensus governance rules, and time for building social capital were qualities that positioned the organization to assume an influential role in the governance regime of the planning process.

Suggested Citation

  • Mary Dengler, 2008. "Finding the Political ‘Sweet Spot’: Sectional Interests, Consensus Power, and the Everglades Restudy (1992–2000)," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(4), pages 766-784, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:40:y:2008:i:4:p:766-784
    DOI: 10.1068/a3965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a3965
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a3965?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. E Swyngedouw, 1997. "Power, Nature, and the City. The Conquest of Water and the Political Ecology of Urbanization in Guayaquil, Ecuador: 1880–1990," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(2), pages 311-332, February.
    2. William D. Leach & Neil W. Pelkey & Paul A. Sabatier, 2002. "Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 645-670.
    3. Frances M. Lynn & George J. Busenberg, 1995. "Citizen Advisory Committees and Environmental Policy: What We Know, What's Left to Discover," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 147-162, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Daanish Mustafa & Philip Reeder, 2009. "‘People Is All That Is Left to Privatize’: Water Supply Privatization, Globalization and Social Justice in Belize City, Belize," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 789-808, September.
    2. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    3. Natasha Cornea & René Véron & Anna Zimmer, 2017. "Clean city politics: An urban political ecology of solid waste in West Bengal, India," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(4), pages 728-744, April.
    4. Axel Marx, 2008. "Limits to non‐state market regulation: A qualitative comparative analysis of the international sport footwear industry and the Fair Labor Association," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 253-273, June.
    5. Sangmin Kim, 2016. "The workings of collaborative governance: Evaluating collaborative community-building initiatives in Korea," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(16), pages 3547-3565, December.
    6. Ya Li & Zhichang Zhu & Catherine M. Gerard, 2012. "Learning from Conflict Resolution: An Opportunity to Systems Thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 209-220, March.
    7. Beierle, Thomas, 1998. "Public Participation in Environmental Decisions: An Evaluation Framework Using Social Goals," RFF Working Paper Series dp-99-06, Resources for the Future.
    8. Manuel Fischer & Philip Leifeld, 2015. "Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 363-382, September.
    9. Kristen Tappenden, 2014. "The district of North Vancouver’s landslide management strategy: role of public involvement for determining tolerable risk and increasing community resilience," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 72(2), pages 481-501, June.
    10. Caron Chess & Kandice L. Salomone & Billie Jo Hance & Alex Saville, 1995. "Results of a National Symposium on Risk Communication: Next Steps for Government Agencies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 115-125, April.
    11. Han Wang & Yueli Xu, 2024. "Achieving Neighborhood-Level Collaborative Governance through Participatory Regeneration: Cases of Three Residential Heritage Neighborhoods in Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, March.
    12. Porter, Madeleine & Franks, Daniel M. & Everingham, Jo-Anne, 2013. "Cultivating collaboration: Lessons from initiatives to understand and manage cumulative impacts in Australian resource regions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 657-669.
    13. Mark Whitehead, 2003. "(Re)Analysing the Sustainable City: Nature, Urbanisation and the Regulation of Socio-environmental Relations in the UK," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(7), pages 1183-1206, June.
    14. Nik Heynen, 2006. "Green Urban Political Ecologies: Toward a Better Understanding of Inner-City Environmental Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(3), pages 499-516, March.
    15. Aimee Guglielmo Kinney & Thomas M. Leschine, 2002. "A Procedural Evaluation of an Analytic‐Deliberative Process: The Columbia River Comprehensive Impact Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 83-100, February.
    16. Verburg, René & Selnes, Trond & Verweij, Pita, 2016. "Governing ecosystem services: National and local lessons from policy appraisal and implementation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 186-197.
    17. Goodwin, Geoff, 2019. "The problem and promise of coproduction: Politics, history, and autonomy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 501-513.
    18. John Selsky & Barbara Parker, 2010. "Platforms for Cross-Sector Social Partnerships: Prospective Sensemaking Devices for Social Benefit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 21-37, July.
    19. Janmaat, Johannus A., 2007. "Stakeholder Engagement in Land Development Decisions: A Waste of Effort?," MPRA Paper 6147, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Gareth A S Edwards & Harriet Bulkeley, 2017. "Urban political ecologies of housing and climate change: The ‘Coolest Block’ Contest in Philadelphia," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(5), pages 1126-1141, April.

    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:sae:envira:v:40:y:2008:i:4:p:766-784. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.