Exclusion: the necessary difference between ideal and practical consensus

Connelly, Stephen; Richardson, Tim

doi:10.1080/0964056042000189772

Cited by 78 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…And so actual decision-making and planning practice in the municipality can still be fragmented between different sectoral fields and affected by conflicts of interest. Research has shown that the ability of politicians and officials to create viable forms of co-operation and to achieve a consensus on objectives is often crucial but at the same time hard to achieve in practice (Connelly and Richardson 2004). In summary, experience teaches us to expect conflicts between transport modes, and tension among different planning sectors and their representatives in local transport and land use planning.…”

Section: Integrated Planning and Steering Culturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Hrelja

2015

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has shown integrated planning to be important for achieving aims concerning more environmentally friendly transport operations, but less good at explaining prerequisites of implementation. This paper analyses how management and working practises in local authorities, here understood as steering cultures, affect implementation of integrated land-use and public transport planning approaches. The analysis builds on case studies of planning in two Swedish municipalities. These have developed two antithetical steering cultures, namely one that can be described as deliberative and one that can be described as sectorised. The paper describes the advantages and disadvantages of these steering cultures. The findings show the deliberative model to facilitate integration through advanced mechanisms of consensus and co-ordination between policy-makers and officials. The sectorised model has no such mechanisms, but this need not result in poor prospects of integrated planning. It is important for integrated planning approaches, whatever the steering culture, to be in line with the institutionalised norms and objectives by which planning practices are governed. Integration therefore needs a normative component, so as to ensure implementation. The important normative component in this context can be construed as discourses and rationales concerning transport and the urban development of which public transport forms part.

show abstract

Section: Integrated Planning and Steering Culturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Hrelja

2015

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Powerful stakeholders, especially leaders of collaborative processes, also tend to have substantial influence over a group's process and outcomes; they often establish the forum, define the purpose and scope of the process, hire the facilitator, set the agenda, and invite participants (Connelly and Richardson 2004). Unlike facilitators, these stakeholders generally do not have the training to recognize the subtle influences that their actions may have on group dynamics and outcomes.…”

Section: Conflict and Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the level of interpersonal communication, productive conflict management requires that stakeholders engage in dialogue and consider diverse views before making decisions, usually based on resolution or consensus (Daniels and Walker 2001). Although consensus is often loosely equated to agreement by all parties, it more accurately reflects the perspective of stakeholders with the most power and a lack of active opposition by others (Connelly andRichardson 2004, Fairclough 2008). …”

Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Power and Conflict in Adaptive Management: Analyzing the Discourse of Riparian Management on Public Lands

Arnold¹,

Koro‐Ljungberg²,

Bartels³

2012

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Adaptive collaborative management emphasizes stakeholder engagement as a crucial component of resilient social-ecological systems. Collaboration among diverse stakeholders is expected to enhance learning, build social legitimacy for decision making, and establish relationships that support learning and adaptation in the long term. However, simply bringing together diverse stakeholders does not guarantee productive engagement. Using critical discourse analysis, we examined how diverse stakeholders negotiated knowledge and power in a workshop designed to inform adaptive management of riparian livestock grazing on a National Forest in the southwestern USA. Publicly recognized as a successful component of a larger collaborative effort, we found that the workshop effectively brought together diverse participants, yet still restricted dialogue in important ways. Notably, workshop facilitators took on the additional roles of riparian experts and instructors. As they guided workshop participants toward a consensus view of riparian conditions and management recommendations, they used their status as riparian experts to emphasize commonalities with stakeholders supportive of riparian grazing and accentuate differences with stakeholders skeptical of riparian grazing, including some Forest Service staff with power to influence management decisions. Ultimately, the management plan published one year later did not fully adopt the consensus view from the workshop, but rather included and acknowledged a broader diversity of stakeholder perspectives. Our findings suggest that leaders and facilitators of adaptive collaborative management can more effectively manage for productive stakeholder engagement and, thus, socialecological resilience if they are more tentative in their convictions, more critical of the role of expert knowledge, and more attentive to the knowledge, interests, and power of diverse stakeholders.

show abstract

“…However, as the probe has produced brief and selective case analyses there are also some limitations. Consent was mainly interpreted as who is supporting the plan, yet this did not describe specifically which interests were accommodated so that actions could be taken (Checkland, 2000) or which topics and people were excluded (Connelly and Richardson, 2004). In addition, it was difficult to determine the stability of the consent (over time and in multiple decision-making rounds) to gain more insight on how influential strategic delta plans truly are in influencing the scope of (implantation) projects in the delta.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latter implies that potential participants, issues and substantive outcomes may be excluded when that would frustrate or weaken the consent (Connelly and Richardson, 2004). Depending on which powerful and influential actors support a delta plan, consent may be strong and long-lasting or weak and momentary.…”

Section: Strategic Spatial Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analytical framework for strategic delta planning: negotiating consent for long-term sustainable delta development

Seijger

Douven

Halsema

et al. 2016

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An analytical framework for strategic delta planning Seijger CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons. Takedown policyPlease contact us and provide details if you believe this document breaches copyrights. We will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

show abstract

Exclusion: the necessary difference between ideal and practical consensus

Cited by 78 publications

References 23 publications

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Power and Conflict in Adaptive Management: Analyzing the Discourse of Riparian Management on Public Lands

An analytical framework for strategic delta planning: negotiating consent for long-term sustainable delta development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About