Skip to main content

Adapting Participative Governance Framework for the Implementation of a Sustainable Development Plan Within an Organization

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This chapter will discuss how participative governance frameworks can also be an interesting approach for Organizations or Institutions targeting a sustainable development goal and how these frameworks can contribute to frame (more) collectively an expected equilibrium between reducing the impact of the economical activities on climate change and environment by maintaining economical growth and respecting social concerns. We will describe and discuss our empirical case study which objective was the implementation of a sustainable development plan within a public Institute. This case study will show the advantage of participatory frameworks and the limits of stakeholders’ participation model in some specific contexts. The practical approach we designed will be introduced with reference to some theoretical frameworks (based on decision aid methodologies, stakeholders’ theory and contracts theories). In particular, different levels of participation (information, consultation, association-participation, and deliberation-concertation), according to three models of democracy (representative, participative and deliberative), have to be distinguished before being used.

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   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    Observatoire National sur les Effets du Changement Climatique ONERC. (2006). Stratégie nationale d’adaptation au changement climatique. 97 pages. http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/ecologie/pdf/Strategie_Nationale_2.17_Mo-2.pdf

  2. 2.

    See for example Climategate accident in November 2009 where the IPCC panel was pointed as using questionable procedures to confirm their hypothesis about CC.

  3. 3.

    See the debates in US about petrol reliance after BP Deepwater Horizon explosion in 20th April 2010 and its catastrophic consequences.

  4. 4.

    See Kyoto protocol ratification, and more recently Copenhaguen forum failure.

  5. 5.

    A large ongoing debate about “Global common goods” is about the enclosure by private ownership (Harding) or a community management of “common goods” semi-decentralized (Ostrom 1977) or global (Godard 1989).

  6. 6.

    See the collaborative work managed by IRSN with the participation of INERIS, AFSSA, INRA, INVS, ADEME and IFEN: Report  “Experts et grand public: quelles perceptions face au risque?” Published in February 2007.

  7. 7.

    See the Risk communication and government. Public and regulation affairs. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/corpaffr/publications/riscomm/riscomm_ch1e.shtml

  8. 8.

    See the Quel horizon pour les sciences de gestion ? Vers une théorie de l’action collective in Les nouvelles fondations des sciences de gestion. Collective book coordinated by David A., Hatchuel A., Laufer R., pp 7–43. Vuibert Edition and LAUFER R. (1996). Quand diriger c’est légitimer. Revue Française de gestion, vol.111, pp. 12–37.

  9. 9.

    See the different laws and conventions like: the Aarhus conventions in 1998 about the right to be informed and involved as citizens in problems dealing with environmental concerns and the 2000/60/CE water directive. In the French context: 95–102 law about environmental protection, 52–1265 law that has instituted the need for dialogue between the State, territorial collectivities and the project manager, 2000–1208 law about solidarities and urban renewal about Local land use planning and more recently Grenelle I and II laws.

  10. 10.

    To know more about this structure: Implementation of local committee in the vicinity of industrial Seveso sites, France. Proceedings of the international seminar “RISK: perception, communication, acceptability”. 3–4 October 2005, Bruges, Belgium, pp. 47–66.

  11. 11.

    See Marc Sengnier. (1905). L’Esprit démocratique. Paris. Perrin. In France, the first step to introduce a counter-power within the organizations started with the law of 1884 called Waldeck-Rousseau law that authorized the trade unions actions.

  12. 12.

    To read more about this model, read Pierre Rosenvallon in “La contre démocratie. La politique à l’âge de la défiance”, Seuil, 2006. Points-Essais, n° 598, 2008 and Joshua Cohen with Joel Rogers “Associations and Democracy”, London, Verso, 1995.

  13. 13.

    To get more details about these approaches see Merad M. (2010). Aide à la décision et expertise en gestion des risques. Editions Lavoisier.

  14. 14.

    This section is based on works submitted to publication in a paper entitled “Using a multi-criteria decision aid methodology to implement sustainable development principles within an Organization” by Merad et al. (2010).

  15. 15.

    “il ne construit pas ce qu’il lui plaît, mais il choisit ce qu’il lui plaît de construire  ”. La création scientifique. Genève: Université de Paris, Ed. René Kister.

  16. 16.

    See Merad et al. (2003). Use of multi-criteria-aids for risk zoning and management of large area subjected to mining-induced hazards. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2004, vol. 19, n° 2 and Merad et al. (2008). Urbanisation control around industrial Seveso sites: the French context. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management - Issue: Volume 8, Number 1-2/2008 -Pages: 158–167.

  17. 17.

    The General Director is nominated by decree by the government.

References

  • Arnstein SR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann 35(4):216–224, July 1969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dechy N, Dien Y, Llory M (2010) Pour une culture des accidents au service de la sécurité industrielle. In: Proceedings of the IMDR, Lambda-Mu 17 conference, La Rochelle, 5–7 October 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Godard O (1989) Jeux de nature; quand le débat sur l’efficacité des politiques publiques contient la question de leur légitimité. In: Mathieu N, Jollivet M (eds) Du rural à l’environnement – la question de la nature aujourd’hui. L’Harmattan, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1987) Théorie de l’agir communicationnel. Edition Fayard, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1992) De l’éthique de la discussion. Edition Cerf, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Held D (1987) Models of democracy. Polity and Stanford University Press, Stanford, p 321

    Google Scholar 

  • Merad M (2010) Aide à la décision et expertise en gestion des risques. Editions Lavoisier, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Merad M, Verdel T, Roy B, Kouniali S (2003) Use of multi-criteria-aids for risk zoning and management of large area subjected to mining-induced hazards. Tunn Undergr Sp Tech 19(2)

    Google Scholar 

  • Merad M, Rodrigues N, Salvi O (2008) Urbanisation control around industrial Seveso sites: the French context. Int J Risk Assess Manag 8(1–2):158–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merad M, Dechy N, Guionnet D, Marcel F (2010a) L’Organisation face aux défis du développement durable - Cas de la mise en place une démarche DD dans un institut public d’expertise dans le domaine de l’environnement industriel et des risques. Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merad M, Serir L, Grabisch M (2010b) Using a multi-criteria decision aid methodology to implement sustainable development principles within an organization. Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merad M, Dechy N, Marcel F (2011) When the organization faces the sustainable development challenges: how to manage risks induced by climate change? In: Linkov I, Bridges T (eds) Climate change: global change and local adaptation. Springer, Amsterdam, 2011, in preparation

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1977) Public goods and public choices. In: Savas ES (ed) Alternative for delivering public services. Westview, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Webler T, Wiedemann P (1995) Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Kluwer Publishers, The Netherlands

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenvallon P (2006) La contre démocratie. La politique à l’âge de la défiance. Seuil, Paris, Points-Essais, n° 598

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe G, Frewer L (2000) Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation science. Sci Technol Hum Val 25(1):3–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Hove S (2003) Participatory approaches for environmental governance: theoretical justifications and practical effects in Stakeholder involvement tools: criteria for choice and evaluation. OCDE/AEN

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Merad .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Merad, M., Dechy, N., Marcel, F. (2012). Adapting Participative Governance Framework for the Implementation of a Sustainable Development Plan Within an Organization. In: Karl, H., Scarlett, L., Vargas-Moreno, J., Flaxman, M. (eds) Restoring Lands - Coordinating Science, Politics and Action. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2549-2_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics