Deliberation as a catalyst for reflexive environmental governance

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    21 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Ecological or ecosystemic reflexivity involves the capacity of social-ecological systems to reconfigure themselves in response to reflection on their performance. In this paperwe argue that deliberation is central to reflexive governance, mainly because it can reconcilemany if not most of the sometimes contradictory claims that are made in the literature about its drivers. We take four key dimensions along which reflexivity may be sought, each of which features a binary that puts two plausible drivers of reflexivity in tension with one another: (i) sources of knowledge (public participation versus expertise); (ii) composition of public discourse (diversity versus consensus); (iii) institutional architecture (polycentricity versus centralization); (iv) institutional dynamics (flexibility versus stability). In each case, we demonstrate that deliberative ideas can manage the tension between the two plausible drivers of reflexivity.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)353-360
    Number of pages8
    JournalEcological Economics
    Volume131
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2017

    Fingerprint

    catalyst
    centralization
    Reflexivity
    Catalyst
    Environmental governance
    Deliberation
    public participation
    public

    Cite this

    @article{bef5826c0e1e420687eefd9347221c0c,
    title = "Deliberation as a catalyst for reflexive environmental governance",
    abstract = "Ecological or ecosystemic reflexivity involves the capacity of social-ecological systems to reconfigure themselves in response to reflection on their performance. In this paperwe argue that deliberation is central to reflexive governance, mainly because it can reconcilemany if not most of the sometimes contradictory claims that are made in the literature about its drivers. We take four key dimensions along which reflexivity may be sought, each of which features a binary that puts two plausible drivers of reflexivity in tension with one another: (i) sources of knowledge (public participation versus expertise); (ii) composition of public discourse (diversity versus consensus); (iii) institutional architecture (polycentricity versus centralization); (iv) institutional dynamics (flexibility versus stability). In each case, we demonstrate that deliberative ideas can manage the tension between the two plausible drivers of reflexivity.",
    keywords = "Reflexive governance, Reflexivity, Environmental governance, Deliberation, Deliberative democracy, Polycentric governance",
    author = "John DRYZEK and Jonathan Pickering",
    year = "2017",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.09.011",
    language = "English",
    volume = "131",
    pages = "353--360",
    journal = "Ecological Economics",
    issn = "0921-8009",
    publisher = "Elsevier",

    }

    Deliberation as a catalyst for reflexive environmental governance. / DRYZEK, John; Pickering, Jonathan.

    In: Ecological Economics, Vol. 131, 01.01.2017, p. 353-360.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Deliberation as a catalyst for reflexive environmental governance

    AU - DRYZEK, John

    AU - Pickering, Jonathan

    PY - 2017/1/1

    Y1 - 2017/1/1

    N2 - Ecological or ecosystemic reflexivity involves the capacity of social-ecological systems to reconfigure themselves in response to reflection on their performance. In this paperwe argue that deliberation is central to reflexive governance, mainly because it can reconcilemany if not most of the sometimes contradictory claims that are made in the literature about its drivers. We take four key dimensions along which reflexivity may be sought, each of which features a binary that puts two plausible drivers of reflexivity in tension with one another: (i) sources of knowledge (public participation versus expertise); (ii) composition of public discourse (diversity versus consensus); (iii) institutional architecture (polycentricity versus centralization); (iv) institutional dynamics (flexibility versus stability). In each case, we demonstrate that deliberative ideas can manage the tension between the two plausible drivers of reflexivity.

    AB - Ecological or ecosystemic reflexivity involves the capacity of social-ecological systems to reconfigure themselves in response to reflection on their performance. In this paperwe argue that deliberation is central to reflexive governance, mainly because it can reconcilemany if not most of the sometimes contradictory claims that are made in the literature about its drivers. We take four key dimensions along which reflexivity may be sought, each of which features a binary that puts two plausible drivers of reflexivity in tension with one another: (i) sources of knowledge (public participation versus expertise); (ii) composition of public discourse (diversity versus consensus); (iii) institutional architecture (polycentricity versus centralization); (iv) institutional dynamics (flexibility versus stability). In each case, we demonstrate that deliberative ideas can manage the tension between the two plausible drivers of reflexivity.

    KW - Reflexive governance

    KW - Reflexivity

    KW - Environmental governance

    KW - Deliberation

    KW - Deliberative democracy

    KW - Polycentric governance

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84989157869&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.09.011

    DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.09.011

    M3 - Article

    VL - 131

    SP - 353

    EP - 360

    JO - Ecological Economics

    JF - Ecological Economics

    SN - 0921-8009

    ER -