Science and Public Participation: An Analysis of Public Scientific Argument in the Yucca Mountain Controversy

Endres, Danielle

doi:10.1080/17524030802704369

Cited by 53 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(60 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A dilemma that faces public policy is, first and intuitively, that technical-scientific knowledge is insufficient to resolve political, social or ethical dilemmas (Endres, 2009). But the criticism cuts further into the very premises of science itself, in which answers and truths of science change in time and space and become obsolete.…”

Section: The Rise and Role Of Science In Modernitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In so doing, the CDA joins the growing body of scholarship that apprehend citizens as more than recipients of scientific information in natural conservation, but as actors capable of critically engaging with expert knowledge (Fischer, 2000;Endres, 2009;Horsbøl, 2009). Namely, they can masterfully marshal technical-ecological jargon to their strategic benefit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Whose Discourse Is It Anyway? Understanding Resistance through the Rise of “Barstool Biology” in Nature Conservation

Essen¹

2015

Environmental Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Rise and Role Of Science In Modernitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Whose Discourse Is It Anyway? Understanding Resistance through the Rise of “Barstool Biology” in Nature Conservation

Essen¹

2015

Environmental Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The recognition that some SE efforts have institutionalized obstacles to co-ownership, particularly those that are dominated by technocratic or mandated approaches, should prompt a careful consideration of the reasons for the SE effort because much SE happens in a sort of one-way or "check-box" kind of engagement (Hamilton 2003, Depoe et al 2004, Endres 2009). These forms of instrumental stakeholder engagement are often motivated by a perceived need to gain buy-in in order to legitimize a particular project or management practice, and are therefore seen as necessary to avoid conflict and ensure smooth implementation of management decisions (Vigar and Healey 2002).…”

Section: Creating Opportunities For Co-ownershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

A simplified approach to stakeholder engagement in natural resource management: the Five-Feature Framework

Talley¹,

Schneider²,

Lindquist³

2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. We distill complex frameworks for stakeholder engagement into five main principles that scientists and natural resource managers can use in planning stakeholder engagement efforts. Many natural resource management professionals, including practitioners and scholars, increasingly recognize the need for, and potential benefits of, engaging stakeholders in complex decision-making processes, yet the implementation of these efforts varies wildly, reflecting great methodological and conceptual diversity. Given the dynamic and diverse natural resource management contexts in which engagement occurs and the often significant stakes involved in making decisions about natural resources, we argue that stakeholder engagement would benefit from a theoretical framework that is both agile and robust. To this end, five essential elements of stakeholder engagement are evaluated and organized to form the Five-Feature Framework, thereby providing a functional and approachable platform with which to consider engagement processes. Aside from introducing and developing the Five-Feature Framework, we apply the framework as a measure to evaluate the empirical case study literature involving stakeholder engagement in natural resource management in an effort to better understand the obstacles facing robust and genuine engagement in natural resource management. Our results suggest that the most basic principles of engagement are often absent from stakeholder engagement projects, which confirms the need for a functional framework. The Five-Feature Framework can be used to plan flexible, adaptable, and rigorous engagement projects in a variety of contexts and with teams that have varying backgrounds and experience. By virtue of its simplicity and functionality, the framework demystifies stakeholder engagement in order to help natural resource professionals build opportunities for collaborative decision-making and integrate citizen values and knowledge into complex management issues.

show abstract

“…In the environmental communication literature, the integration, or lack thereof, of expert and non-expert knowledge in environmental decision-making processes has received substantial attention. Research shows that non-expert, local information is sometimes dismissed [77,78], while technical, expert knowledge is sought and privileged [79][80][81][82]. Top-down decision making processes can create boundaries around knowledge integration in which: -impacts important to stakeholders and the polity may be ignored or that the mechanisms for assessing the magnitudes of impacts are constructed in a way that delegitimizes nonscientific constructions‖ [83].…”

Section: Boundaries For Democratic Engagement: Participation and Legimentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing the Complexities of Boundary Work in Sustainability Science through Communication

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability science seeks to identify and implement workable solutions to complex problems. This transdisciplinary approach advances a commitment to work across boundaries that occur among individuals, disciplines, and institutions to build capacities for informed and innovative decision making in the face of uncertainty and change. The concept of boundary work and related discussions of boundary objects and organizations are important, expanding focal areas within sustainability science. While communication is described as central to boundary work, insights from the field of communication have largely yet to inform theorizing about boundaries within sustainability science. In this paper, we highlight three communication perspectives, namely media studies, collaboration and partnerships, and systems theories, which are particularly relevant for understanding how boundaries form, the social context in which boundary work occurs, and informed strategies for enhanced boundary spanning and management. We use three case studies to illustrate how communication theories and methods provide dynamic and strategic lenses within transdisciplinary processes to enable collaborators to build capacity for change, sustain critical and reflective inquiry, and approach difference as generative in collective efforts to produce sustainability. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2013, 5 4196

show abstract

Science and Public Participation: An Analysis of Public Scientific Argument in the Yucca Mountain Controversy

Cited by 53 publications

References 44 publications

Whose Discourse Is It Anyway? Understanding Resistance through the Rise of “Barstool Biology” in Nature Conservation

Whose Discourse Is It Anyway? Understanding Resistance through the Rise of “Barstool Biology” in Nature Conservation

A simplified approach to stakeholder engagement in natural resource management: the Five-Feature Framework

Addressing the Complexities of Boundary Work in Sustainability Science through Communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About