Constructing the public: the 'substantive sieve' and personal norms in US Forest Service Planning
In fulfilling its public involvement requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) the US Forest Service sometimes favours scientific, technical or legally-based public input over comments that explicitly express the values or preferences of the public. We trace the roots of this tendency to the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) NEPA regulations and to agency planning guidelines that direct agency employees to address only 'substantive' or 'significant' comments. We term this guidance and the tendency to favour certain types of public input the 'substantive sieve', and show how it may influence agency constructions of the public. We discuss the implications of our findings in the context of agency NEPA public involvement processes.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 54 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 |
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:54:y:2011:i:3:p:403-419. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.