Abstract
In this introduction, I will start my contribution by recalling a personal experience. Disconnecting my ideas from that experience would critically impoverish my capacity to convey my ideas’ underlying motive and, I believe, their significance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Arcuri A (2005) Governing the risk of ultra-hazardous activities: challenge for contemporary legal systems. Ph.D. thesis, Rotterdam Erasmus University, Rotterdam
Basta C (2009) Risk, territory and society: challenge for a joint European regulation. Ph.D. thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft
Basta C (2011) Risk and spatial planning. In: Roeser S (ed in chief) et al. Handbook of risk theory. Springer, Berlin, pp 265–294
Basta C, van der Knaap W, Carsjens GJ (2012) Planning today the energy landscapes of tomorrow: from extended collaborative approaches to individual active planning. In: van Dobbelsteen A, Stremke S (eds) Sustainable energy landscapes: designing, planning and development. Taylor & Francis, London
Beck U (1992) Risk society: towards a new modernity. Sage Publication, London
Bennebroek B (2010) Ethical desirability of carbon capture and storage in Barendrecht. Student Essay, Delft University of Technology. Online at http://basbennebroek.nl/portfolio/ethical_desirability_ccs_barendrecht.pdf
Boholm A (2004) What are the new perspectives on siting controversies? J Risk Res 7(2):99–100
Boholm A, Lofsted R (2004) Facility siting: risk, power and identity in land use planning. Earthscan, London
Breunese JN, Remmelts G (2009) Inventory of potential locations for demonstration project CO2-storage, TNO-034-UT-2009-02024, The Netherlands
Brunsting S et al (2011) Stakeholder participation practices and onshore CCS: lessons from the Dutch CCS case Barendrecht. Energy Proced 4:6376–6383
Council Directive 96/82/EC on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, OJ L 10/13
Davy B (1996) Fairness as compassion: towards a less unfair facility siting policy. Risk 7(2):99–108
Fainstein SS (2010) The just city. Cornell University Press, Ithaca
Gunder M (2008) Ideologies of certainty in a risky reality: beyond the hauntology of planning. Plann Theory 7(2):186–206
Hansson SO, Peterson M (2001) Rights, risks, and residual obligations. Risk Decis Policy 6:157–166
Harper T, Stein S (1992) The centrality of normative ethical theory to contemporary planning theory. J Plann Educ Res 11(2):105–116
Hayden Lesbirel S, Shaw D (2005) Managing conflict in facility siting. Edward Elgar, Cheltenam
Healey P (1997) Collaborative planning. Shaping places in fragmented societies. MacMillan Press, Houndmills/London
Healey P (2003) Collaborative planning in perspective. Plann Theory 2(2):101–123
Howe J, Langdon C (2002) Towards a reflexive planning theory. Plann Theory 1(3):209–225
Hudson B (2003) Justice in the risk society: challenging and re-affirming justice in late modernity. Sage, London
Huitema D (2002) Hazardous decisions. Hazardous waste siting in the UK, The Netherlands and Canada, institutions and discourses. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht
Keller LR, Sarin RK (1995) Fair processes for societal decisions involving distributional inequalities. Risk Anal 15(1):49–59
Kuijper M (2011) Public acceptance challenges for onshore CO2 storage in Barendrecht. Energy Procedia 4:6226–6233
Leiss W (2001) Ulrich Beck “Risk society” (1996) book review. Can J Sociol. Online at http://www.ualberta.ca/∼cjscopy/articles/leiss.html
Linnerooth-Bayer J (2005) Fair strategies for siting hazardous waste facilities. In: Hayden Lesbirel S, Shaw D (eds) Managing conflict in facility siting. Edward Elgar, Cheltenam
Linnerooth-Bayer J, Fitzgerald KB (1996) Conflicting views on fair siting processes: evidence from Austria and the U.S. Risk 7(2):119–134
Linnerooth-Bayer J, Löfstedt RE (1996) Fairness and siting: introduction to a symposium. Risk 7(2):95–98
Moroni S (1994) Territorio e giustizia distributiva [Territory and distributive justice]. Angeli, Milano
Moroni S (1997) Etica e territorio [Ethics and land use]. Angeli, Milano
Owens S (2004a) Siting, sustainable development and social priorities. J Risk Res 7(2):101–114
Owens S (2004b) New agendas for appraisal: reflections on theory, practice, and research. Environ Plann A 36:1943–1959
Peterson M (2003) Risk, equality, and the priority view. Risk Decis Policy 8:17–23
Peterson M, Hansson SO (2004) On the application of right-based moral theories to siting controversies. J Risk Res 7(2):269–275
Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Harvard University Press, Harvard
Rawls J (1988) The priority of right and ideas of the good. Philos Public Aff 17(4):251–276
Roeser S (2006) The role of emotions in judging the moral acceptability of risks. Saf Sci 44:689–700
Roeser S (2010) Emotions and risky technologies. Springer, Berlin
Simmons P, Walker G (2004) Living with technological risk: industrial encroachment on sense of place. In: Boholm A, Lofsted R (eds) Facility siting: risk, power and identity in land use planning. Earthscan, London
Stein SM, Harper T (2005) Rawls’s “Justice as fairness”: a moral basis for contemporary planning theory. Plann Theory 4(2):147–172
Terwel BW et al. (2012) It’s not only about safety: beliefs and attitudes of 811 local residents regarding a CCS project in Barendrecht. Int J Greenh Gas Control 9:41–51
VROM (2007) New energy for climate policy: the “clean and efficient” programme, online. Available at: http://www2.vrom.nl/docs/internationaal/New%20Energy%20for%20Climate%20Policy.pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Additional information
Notes
1.I wish to thank my coeditor Stefano Moroni for having monitored the progresses of this chapter throughout its entire development. A warm thank goes to Stefan Koller, who patiently revised its final version and provided helpful critical remarks. Finally, I wish to thank all the participants of the workshop “The Ethics of the Built Environment” that led to the publication of this volume for their priceless contribution and progressively growing enthusiasm.
2.See, for instance, Rawls (1988, p. 257): “Provided due precautions are taken … we can in principle expand the list to include other goods….” “… If necessary the list of primary goods can in principle be expanded” (p. 257).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Basta, C. (2013). Risk, Space, and Distributive Justice. In: Basta, C., Moroni, S. (eds) Ethics, Design and Planning of the Built Environment. Urban and Landscape Perspectives, vol 12. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5246-7_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5246-7_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5245-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5246-7
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)