Skip to main content

Citizens' Voices in Environmental Policy

The Contribution of Integrated Assessment Focus Groups to Accountable Decision-Making

  • Chapter

Environmental problems are becoming increasingly complex. They are no longer limited to reducing a toxic by-product of a specific activity by some well-defined technological fix. Rather, for issues like climate change mitigation or integrated water management, intricate interactions among many natural and social systems have to be taken into account. Scientific uncertainties are significant, and many actors with diverging interests are involved. This has far-reaching implications for the roles of experts and of stakeholders, including ordinary citizens, in environmental policy-making.

On the one hand, the role of science and expert knowledge is changing. Major uncertainties, both in the science and the politics of environmental issues, mean that expert knowledge cannot provide a complete and uncontestable description of the issues. Rather than offering clear and compelling advice to determine policy, such expert knowledge becomes only one part of a broader process of social learning (Beck, 1994: 1–55; see also Lemos & Morehouse, 2005). While expert knowledge is required more than ever to address today's complex environmental problems, it is needed as evidence informing societal debates (Jasanoff, 1991: 29–47), rather than in the mode captured by the familiar aphorism of ‘speaking truth to power’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alcamo, J. (Ed.) (1994). IMAGE 2.0: Integrated modelling of global climate change. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alcamo, J., Shaw, R., & Hordijk, L. (1990). The RAINS model of acidification, science and strategies in Europe. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basch, C. E. (1987). Focus group interview: An underutilized research technique for improving theory and practice. Health Education Quarterly, 4, 411–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (1994). The reinvention of politics: Towards a theory of reflexive modernization. In U. Beck, A. Giddens, & S. Lash (Eds.), Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byers, P. Y. & Wilcox, J. R. (1991). Focus groups: A qualitative opportunity for researchers. Journal of Business Communication, 1, 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cebon, P., Dahinden, U., Davies, H. C., Imboden, D., & Jaeger, C.C. (Eds.) (1998). Views from the Alps. Towards regional assessments of climate change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, K. K. & Higginbotham, J. B. (1976). Application of focus group interview in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 1, 77–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahinden, U., Querol, C., Jäger, J., & Nilsson, M. (2002). Citizen interaction with computer models. In B. Kasemir, J. Jäger, C. C. Jaeger, & M. T. Gardner (Eds.), Public participation in sustainability science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deswouges, W. H. & Smith, K. V. (1988). Focus groups and risk communication. The science of listening to data. Risk Analysis, 4, 479–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dürrenberger, G. et al. (1997). Focus groups in integrated assessment. A manual for a participatory tool. ULYSSES Working Paper WP-97–92. Darmstadt, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Climate Forum (2004). What is dangerous climate change? Initial Results of a Symposium on Key Vulnerable Regions Climate Change and Article 2 of the UNFCCC Buenos Aires, 14 December 2004. Internet: http://www.european-climate-forum.net

  • Funtowicz, S. O. & Ravetz, J. R. (1992). Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Social theories of risk. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007). Summary for policy makers. Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, C. C., Schüle, R., & Kasemir, B. (1999). Focus groups in integrated assessment: A micro-cosmos for reflexive modernization. Innovation, 2, 195–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jäger, J. (1998). Current thinking on using scientific findings in environmental policy making. Environmental Modelling and Assessment, 3, 143–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (1991). Acceptable evidence in a pluralistic society. In D. G. Mayo & R. D. Hollander (Eds.), Acceptable evidence: Science and values in risk management. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasemir, B., Dahinden, U., Gerger, Å., Schüle, R., Tabara, D., & Jaeger, C. C. (2000). Citizens' perspectives on climate change and energy use. Global Environmental Change, 3, 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasemir, B., Schibli, D., Stoll, S., & Jaeger, C. C. (2000). Involving citizens in climate and energy assessments. Environment, 3, 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasemir, B., Toth, F., & Masing, V. (2000). Climate policy, venture capital, and European integration. Journal of Common Market Studies, 5, 889–901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasemir, B., Jaeger, C. C., & Jäger, J. (2003). Citizen participation in sustainability assessments. In B. Kasemir, J. Jäger, C. C. Jaeger, & M. T. Gardner (Eds.), Public participation in sustain-ability science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasemir, B., Jäger, J., Jaeger, C. C., & Gardner, M. T. (Eds.) (2003). Public participation in sus-tainability science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, C. & White, W. R. (Eds.) (1994). Integrated river basin development. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leskinen, A. (1994). Environmental planning as learning: The principles of negotiation, the disaggregative decision-making method and parallel organization in developing the road administration. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemos, M. C. & Morehouse, B. J. (2005). The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments. Global Environmental Change, 15(1), 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. E. & Cohen, D. K. (1979). Usable knowledge: Social science and social problem solving. New Haven, CT/London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGlade, J. (1999). SimCoast: An expert system for sustainable coastal zone management. Interdisciplinary scientific methodologies for the sustainable use and management of coastal resource systems. ASEAN — EU Workshop on Major Environmental Inputs, June 20–26, Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. & Kendall, P. (1946). The focused interview. American Journal of Sociology, 51, 541–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mostert, E., van Beek, E., Bouman, N. W. M., Hey, E., Savenije, H. H. G., & Thissen, W. A. H. (1999). River basin management and planning. Keynote paper for International Workshop on River Basin Management, October 27–29, The Hague, www.ct.tudelft.nl/rba/Keynote.html

  • Nelkin, D. (1977). Technological decisions and democracy. European experiments in public participation. Beverly Hills, CA/London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny, H. (2001). Re-thinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parson, E. (1995). Integrated assessment and environmental policy making. Energy Policy, 4–5, 463–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priscoli, J. D. (1999). What is public participation in water resources management and why is it important? Participatory processes in water management. Satellite Conference to the World Conference on Science, Technical Documents in Hydrology 30. UNESCO, International Hydrological Programme, June 28–30, Budapest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Querol, C., Swartling, Å. G., Kasemir, B., & Tàbara, D. (2002). Citizens' reports on climate strategies. In B. Kasemir, J. Jäger, C. C. Jaeger, & M. T. Gardner (Eds.), Public participation in sustainability science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raskin, P., Heaps, C., Sieber, J., & Pontius, G. (1996). PoleStar system manual. Boston, MA: Stockholm Environment Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., Webler, T., & Wiedemann, P. (1995). Fairness and competence in citizen participation: Models for environmental discourse. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. (1998). Methods for IA: The challenges and opportunities ahead. Environmental Modelling and Assessment, 3, 155–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. & Asselt, M. B. A. (1996). Integrated assessment: A growing child on its way to maturity. Climatic Change, 3–4, 327–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. & de Vries, B. (1997). Perspectives on global change: The TARGETS approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, G. & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values, 1, 3–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlumpf, C., Behringer, J., Dürrenberger, G., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (1998). The personal CO2 calculator — A modelling tool for participatory integrated assessment methods. Environmental Modelling and Assessment, 1, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sluijs, van der (1996). Integrated assessment models and the management of uncertainty. IIASA working paper No. WP 96–119, IIASA, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, J. (1997). National and international efforts at integrated coastal management: Definitions, achievements, and lessons. Coastal Management, 1, 3–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman, J. D. & Sweeney, L. B. (2007). Understanding public complacency about climate change: Adults' mental models of climate change violate conservation of matter. Climatic Change, 3–4, 213–238.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Toth, F. L. & Hizsnyik, E. (1998). Integrated environmental assessment: Evolution and applications. Environmental Modelling and Assessment, 3, 193–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP (1999). Global environmental outlook 2000. UNEP's Millennium Report on the Environment. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Water Commission (2000). A water secure world. Vision for water, life and the environment. World Water Vision Commission Report, Marseille/Montpellier, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welp, M. (1999). Defining integrated coastal management for the Baltic Sea Region. In L. Hedegaard & B. Lindström (Eds.), The NEBI yearbook 1999: North European and Baltic Sea integration. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welp, M., de la Vega-Leinert, A. C., Stoll-Kleemann, S., & Fürstenau, C. (2006). Science-based stakeholder dialogues in climate change research. In S. Stoll-Kleemann & M. Welp (Eds.), Stakeholder dialogues in natural resources management. Theory and practice. Berlin/ Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welp, M., de la Vega-Leinert, A. C., Stoll-Kleemann, S., & Jaeger, C. C. (2006). Science-based stakeholder dialogues: Tools and theories. Global Environmental Change, 2, 170–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weyant, J., Davidson, O., Dowlatabadi, H., Edmonds, J., & Grubb, M. (1996). Integrated assessment of climate change: An overview and comparison of approaches and results. In J. Bruce, H. Lee, & E. Haites (Eds.), Economic and social dimensions of climate change. Cambridge: IPCC, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1996). May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. In S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Risk, environment & modernity. Towards a new ecology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Welp .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science + Business Media B.V

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Welp, M., Kasemir, B., Jaeger, C.C. (2009). Citizens' Voices in Environmental Policy. In: Coenen, F.H.J.M. (eds) Public Participation and Better Environmental Decisions. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9325-8_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics