Advertisement

Keywords

Natural Resource Management Public Participation Participatory Process Citizen Participation Collaborative Planning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agnew, C., Burgess, J., Collins, K., Dando, N., Harrison, C., Hobson, K., Munton, R., Murlis, J. (1999). An analytical and descriptive model of sustainable development. A report prepared for the Environment Agency as part of the national Research and Development Programme, 1998–1999. ESRU/UCL, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Averbeck, C. (2006). Incorporating Local People through Economic Incentives at Lake Mburo National Park, Uganda — Africa works! In: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, M. (eds). Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  3. Barber, B.R. (1984). Strong democracy. University of California Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Baughman, M. (1995). Mediation. In: Renn, O., Webler, T., Wiedemann, P. (eds). Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Evaluating models for environmental discourse. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 253–265Google Scholar
  5. Burgess, J. (1995). Growing in confidence: understanding people’s perceptions of urban fringe woodlands. Countryside Commission Technical Report CCP 457. Countryside Commission, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  6. Burgess, J. (1996). Focusing on fear: the use of focus groups in a project for the Community Forest Unit. Countryside Commission Area 28(2), 130–135Google Scholar
  7. Burgess, J., Harrison, C.M., Limb, M. (1988c). People, parks and the urban green: a study of popular meanings and values for open spaces in the city. Urban Studies 25, 455–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carpenter, S.L., Kennedy, W.J.D. (1991). Managing public disputes: a practical guide to handling conflict and reaching agreements. Jossey-Bass Management Series. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  9. Chess, C. (2000). Evaluating Environmental Public Participation: Methodological Questions. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43(6), 769–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Durant, J. (1995). An experiment in democracy. In: Joss, S., Durant, J. (eds). Public participation in science. The role of consensus conferences in Europe. Science Museum with the support of the European Commission Directorate General XII, London, 75–80Google Scholar
  11. Eijndhoven, J.v., Wynne, B. et al. (2001). Evaluation in the Mangement of Global Environmental Risks. In: The Social Learning Group: Learning to Manage Global Environmental Risks Vol. 2. MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  12. Feindt, P. (2001). Regierung durch Diskussion? Diskurs-und Verhandlungsverfahren im Kontext von Demokratietheorie und Steuerungsdiskussion. Peter Lang Verlag, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  13. Fetterman, D.M. (1996). Empowerment evaluation: an introduction to theory and practice. In: Fetterman, D.M., Kafterian, S.J., Wandersman, A. (eds). Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-assessment and Responsibility. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  14. Fiorino, D.J. (1990). Citizen participation and enviornmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, and Human Values (15), 226–243Google Scholar
  15. Fischer, F. (1993). Citizen participation and the democratization of policy expertise: From theoretical inquiry to practical cases. Policy Sciences 26, 165–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fischer, F., Forester, J. (1993). The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Duke University Press, Durham, NCGoogle Scholar
  17. Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Rationality and power: democracy in practice. University of Chicago Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the face of power. University of California Press, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  19. Forester, J. (1993). Critical theory, public policy and planning practice. State University of New York Press, Albany, NYGoogle Scholar
  20. Forester, J. (1996a). The rationality of listening, emotional sensitivity, and moral vision. In: Mandelbaum, S.J., Mazza, L., Burchell, R.W. (eds). Explorations in planning theory. Centre for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers. The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, 204–224Google Scholar
  21. Forester, J. (1996b). Argument, power, and passion in planning practice. In: Mandelbaum, S.J., Mazza, L., Burchell, R.W. (eds). Explorations in planning theory. Centre for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers. The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, 241–262Google Scholar
  22. Grove-White, R., Macnaghten, P., Mayer, S., Wynne, B. (1997). Uncertain world. Genetically modified organisms, food and public attitudes in Britain. Centre for the Study of Environmental Change, LancasterGoogle Scholar
  23. Guba, E., Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Sage, Newbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  24. Harrison, C.M., Burgess, J. (1994). Social constructions of nature: a case study of the conflicts over Rainham Marshes SSSI. Transactions, Institute of British Geographers (19), 291–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative planning. Shaping places in fragmented societies. Macmillan Press, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  26. Helling, A. (1998). Collaborative visioning: Proceed with caution! Results from Atlanta’s Vision 2020 Project. Journal of the American Planning Association 64(3), 335–349Google Scholar
  27. Hockings, M., Stolton, S., Dudley, N. (2000). Evaluating effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing the Management of Protected Areas. International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoggett, P. (1995). Does local government want local democracy? Town and Country Planning April 1995, 107–109Google Scholar
  29. Hoy, D.C. (1986). Power, repression, progress: Foucault, Lukes, and the Frankfurt School. In: Hoy, D.C. (ed). Foucault: a critical reader. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 123–148Google Scholar
  30. Innes, J.E. (1996a). Planning through consensus building. A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. Journal of the American Planning Association 62(4), 460–472Google Scholar
  31. Innes, J.E. (1996b). Group processes and the social construction of growth management: Florida, Vermont, and New Jersey. In: Mandelbaum, S.J., Mazza, L., Burchell, R.W. (eds). Explorations in planning theory. Centre for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers. The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, 164–187Google Scholar
  32. Innes, J.E. (1998). Information in communicative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 64(1), 52–63Google Scholar
  33. Innes, J.E., Booher, D.E. (1999). Consensus building as role playing and bricolage. Toward a theory of collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 65(1), 9–26Google Scholar
  34. Innes, J.E., Gruber, J., Neuman, M., Thompson, R. (1994). Coordination growth and environmental management through consensus building. CPS Brief 6(4). California Policy Seminar, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  35. Joss, S. (1995). Evaluating consensus conferences: Necessity or luxury? In: Joss, S., Durant, J. (eds). Public participation in science. The role of consensus conferences in Europe. Science Museum with the support of the European Commission Directorate General XII, London, 89–108Google Scholar
  36. Kearns, A. (1995). Active citizenship and local governance: Political and geographical dimensions. Political Geography 14(2), 155–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kuper, R. (1997). Deliberating waste: The Hertfordshire citizens’ jury. Local Environment 2(2), 139–153Google Scholar
  38. Lauber, T.B., Knuth, B.A. (1997). Fairness in moose mangement decision-making: the citizens’ perspective. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25(4), 776–787Google Scholar
  39. Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. In: Williams, D.D. (ed). Naturalistic evaluation. New directions for program evaluation No. 30. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 73–84Google Scholar
  40. Macnaghten, P., Grove-White, R., Jacobs, M., Wynne, B. (1995). Public perceptions and sustainability: indicators, institutions, participation. Lancashire County Planning Department, PrestonGoogle Scholar
  41. Moore, C. (1987). The mediation process: Practical strategies for resolving conflict. 1st edition. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  42. Mumpower, J.L. (2001). Selecting and evaluating tools and methods for public participation. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management 1(1), 66–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nothdurft, W. (1995). Environmental mediation: insights into the microcosm and outlooks for political implications. In: Renn, O., Webler, T., Wiedemann, P. (eds). Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Evaluating models for environmental discourse. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 267–282Google Scholar
  44. Oakeshott, M. (1962). Rationalism in politics. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Oels, A. (2000). ‘Let’s get together and feel alright!’ Eine kritische Untersuchung von ‘Agenda 21’-Prozessen in England und Deutschland. In: Heinelt, H., Mühlich, E. (eds). Lokale ‚Agenda 21’-Prozesse. Leske und Budrich, Opladen, 182–200Google Scholar
  46. Oels, A. (2002). Investigating the emotional roller-coaster ride: A case-study-based assessment of the Future Search Conference Design. Systems Research and Behavioral Science. Special Issue: Participatory Planning and Designing. John Wiley & Sons LtdGoogle Scholar
  47. Oels, A. (2003). Evaluating stakeholder participation in the transition to sustainable development. Methodology, case studies, policy implications. LIT-Verlag, MünsterGoogle Scholar
  48. Oppermann, B., Langer, K. (2002). Die Qualität partizipativer und kooperativer Projekte in der Technikfolgenabschätzung. Arbeitsbericht der Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung Nr. 226, Dezember 2002. Akademie für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden-Württemberg, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  49. O’Riordan, T., Voisey, H.D. (1998a). The political economy of the sustainability transition. In: O’Riordan, T., Voisey, H.D. (eds). The transition to sustainability. The politics of Agenda 21 in Europe. Earthscan, London, 3–30Google Scholar
  50. Petts, J. (1997). The public-expert interface in local waste management decisions: Expertise, credibility and process. Public Understanding of Science 6, 359–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Polanyi, M.F.D. (2002). Communicative action in practice: Future Search and the pursuit of an open, critical and non-coercive large group process. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 19(4), 357–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pomeroy, R.S., Parks, J.E., Watson, L.M. (2003). How is your MPA doing? A Guidebook of Natural and Social Indicators for Evaluating Marine Protected Area Management Effectiveness. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  53. Pretty, J. (2002). People, livelihoods and collective action in biodiversity management. In: O’Riordan, T., Stoll-Kleemann, S. (eds). Biodiversity, Sustainability and Human Communities. Protecting beyond the Protected. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  54. Pretty, J., Ward, H. (2001). Social capital and the environment. World Development 29(2), 209–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Renn, O., Webler, T., Wiedemann, P. (1995). Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Evaluating models for environmental discourse. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  56. Rocha, E.M. (1997). A ladder of empowerment. Journal of Planning Education and Research 17, 31–44Google Scholar
  57. Rossi, J. (1997). Participation run amok: The costs of mass particiation for deliberative agency decisionmaking. Northwestern University Law Review 92(1), 173–249Google Scholar
  58. Rowe, G., Frewer, J.L. (2000). Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation. Science, Technology and Human Values 25(1), 3–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schattschneider, E.E. (1960). The semisovereign people. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Selle, K. (1996). Planung und Kommunikation. Gestaltung von Planungsprozessen in Quartier, Stadt und Landschaft. Grundlagen, Methoden, Praxiserfahrungen. Bauverlag, Wiesbaden, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  61. Steelman, T.A., Ascher, W. (1997). Public involvement methods in natural resource policy making: advantages, disadvantages and trade-offs. Policy Sciences 30, 71–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Street, P. (1997). Scenario workshops: A participatory approach to sustainable urban living? Futures 29(2), 139–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Susskind, L., Cruikshank, J. (1987). Breaking the impasse: Consensual approaches to resolving public disputes. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  64. Susskind, L., McKearnen, S., Thomas-Larmer, J. (1999). The consensus building handbook: A comprehensive guide to reaching agreement. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  65. Weber, S.M. (2005). Rituale der Transformation. Großgruppenverfahren als pädagogisches Wissen am Markt. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  66. Webler, T. (1995). ‘Right’ discourse in citizen participation: An evaluative yardstick. In: Renn, O., Webler, T., Wiedemann, P. (eds). Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Evaluating models for environmental discourse. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 35–86Google Scholar
  67. Welp, M., Kasemir, B., Jaeger, C. C. (in press). Citizens’ voices in environmental policy: The contribution of integrated assessment focus groups to accountable decision-making. In: Coenen, F.H.J.M., Paterson, R. (eds). The Promise and Limits of Participatory Processes for the Quality of Environmentally Related Decision Making. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  68. Wilcox, D. (1994). The guide to effective participation. Delta Press, BrightonGoogle Scholar
  69. Zadek, S. (1994). Trading ethics: Auditing the market. Journal of Economic Issues 28(2), 631–645Google Scholar
  70. Zadek, S., Evans, R. (1993). Auditing the market: A practical approach to social auditing. Traidcraft/New Economics Foundation, GatesheadGoogle Scholar
  71. Zadek, S., Raynard, P. (1995). Accounting works: A comparative review of contemporary approaches to social and ethical accounting. Accounting Forum 19(2/3), 164–175Google Scholar
  72. Zadek, S., Pruznan, P., Evans, R. (1997). Building corporate accountability: Emerging practices in social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  73. Zilleßen, H. (ed.) (1998). Mediation, Kooperatives Konfliktmanagement in der Umweltpolitik. Westdeutscher Verlag, OpladenGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angela Oels
    • 1
  1. 1.University of HamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations