Radical Stakeholders and the Craft of Environmental Public Policy: Security Dimensions, Considerations and Implications

Abstract

Among the terrorist threats to the American homeland, law enforcement authorities have previously characterized the danger posed by the radical environmentalist movement (REM) as severe. In order to counter the threat, decision makers must recognize that public policies beyond the existing counterterrorism framework -especially those that concern the environment -might have a mitigating effect on support for the REM movement and its potential use of violent tactics. Officials should focus on policy ownership and delegitimizing its leaders' narratives when crafting such policies. Ultimately, the approach to countering the radical environmental movement must be comprehensive: it should not rely on the narrow tenets of counterterrorism alone and should encompass other policy mechanisms in order to best mitigate this threat.

What's Your “Position” on Nuclear Power? An Exploration of Conflict in Stakeholder Participation for Decision‐making about Risky Technologies

“…Yet heightened risk perceptions will (and, arguably, already have) increase the potential for conflict in stakeholder interactions concerning future decisionmaking for nuclear power generation in democratic societies (Poetz 2010). The need for a better understanding of the diversity of perspectives, including those of scientists and decision-makers, has been noted (Bonano et al 2011), as has the need for understanding the diversity of issues in order to inform more comprehensive policies (Deshpande 2011). Thus, the aim of this paper is to 'map' the boundaries of divergence in perspectives and major contested issues related to nuclear power generation facilities.…”