Public participation in impact assessment: A social learning perspective

Stimulating Learning through Policy Experimentation: A Multi-Case Analysis of How Design Influences Policy Learning Outcomes in Experiments for Climate Adaptation

“…This typology has been used in several empirical studies to conceptualise and measure learning in collective settings relevant to environmental governance [3,27,30,31]. The first two learning types resonate strongly with the policy learning literature [27] whereas relational learning reflects the notions of understanding others' roles and capacities, which are developed in the social learning literature [28,32]. We use the typology here because it draws clear distinctions useful for empirical analysis and it separately categorises relational learning, which has previously been subsumed under normative or "higher forms" of learning [32].…”

“…Like second-order or conceptual learning, normative learning is considered vital to bring about systemic change [27]. Relational learning refers to the non-cognitive aspects of learning improvements in understanding of other participants' mindsets and an increase in trust and cooperation within the group, which gives a participant a sense of fairness and ownership over the process that in turn may increase acceptance of the new management approach [28,29]. A list of factors derived from the literature that are expected to have a positive influence on these learning effects is summarised in Table 1 and discussed in Section 2.4.…”

Learning through public involvement in environmental assessment hearings

“…The need for public participation in EA decision making is well established both in theoretical and applied assessment literature (Parenteau, 1988;Webler, 1995). In addition to contributing to the general goal of individual empowerment, public participation: † accentuates the effectiveness of the EA process (Mitchell, 1997); † actualizes the principles of democracy (Gelhorn, 1971;Fox, 1979;Zimmerman, 1986;Shepard and Bowler, 1997); † ensures that the project meets the needs of the public, in terms of both purpose and design (Pearce et al, 1979;Forester, 1989;Tauxe, 1995;Shepard and Bowler, 1997); † assigns legitimacy to a project because the assessment process appears to be transparent (Chapin and Deneau, 1978;Susskind and Cruikshank, 1987); † provides avenues for conflict resolution for stakeholders (Mitchell, 1997;Shepard and Bowler, 1997;Diduck, 1999); † provides a forum for the submission and inclusion of local knowledge in the EA decision (Usher, 2000); and † provides for a more comprehensive consideration of factors on which decisions are based (Parenteau, 1988;Webler et al, 1995;Shepard and Bowler, 1997).…”

“…As such, education becomes both a precondition for, and an outcome of, fair and effective consultation of stakeholders. Furthermore, according to Webler et al (1995), "if public participation practitioners orient processes to promote social learning then public participation will become more effective at strengthening democracy and overcoming the tendency of people to be rational egotists. "…”

Assessing potential future environmental legal events

“…That role is one of balancing expert opinion with more general public concerns. In a demanding, long Swiss case study, Webler et al (1995) found that participants in the environmental decision-making process often laughed and made fun of the experts as Fachidioten (a German word which implies one-track expert competence, but ignorance of the big picture).…”