Browse > Article

Public Deliberation for Technological Risk Policy Making in a Real-World Context  

Lee, Yun-Jeong (한국연구재단 국책연구본부)
Publication Information
Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society / v.20, no.4, 2017 , pp. 837-857 More about this Journal
Abstract
This paper examines the gap between the theoretical premises of, and the ways that public deliberative approaches to decision-making function in application to a specific instance of technological risk policy. An interrogation of a UK nationwide public deliberation case-the CoRWM program (Committee on Radioactive Waste Management)-a real-world instance of public deliberation illuminates some significant contrasts in the ways that public deliberation takes place to those characterized in theory. A public-engaged deliberation on radioactive waste management in reality does not emerge as rational reasoning for the common good. Instead, it was rather a complex mix of various forms of material, social and political interactions, and relationships.
Keywords
Technological Risk; Policy-Making; Pubic Deliberation; Interactions and Relations; Radioactive Waste Management;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Bloomfield, D., Collins, K., Fry, C. and Munton, R. (2001), "Deliberation and Inclusion: Vehicles for Increasing Trust in UK Public Governance?", Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 19(4): 501-513.   DOI
2 Blowers, A., Lowry, D. and Solomon, B. (1991), The International Politics of Nuclear Waste. London: Macmillan.
3 Bohman, J. (1996), Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
4 Chilvers, J. (2007), "Towards Analytic‐deliberative Forms of Risk Governance in the UK? Reflecting on Learning in Radioactive Waste", Journal of Risk Research, 10(2): 197-222.   DOI
5 Chilvers, J. (2008), "Deliberating Competence: Theoretical and Practitioner Perspectives on Effective Participatory Appraisal Practice", Science and Technology & Human Values, 33(2): 155-185.   DOI
6 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs et al. (2002), Managing Radioactive Waste Safely: Summary of Responses to the Consultation September 2001-March 2002. (A consultation report published jointly by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the National Assembly for Wales, the Scottish Executive and the Department of Environment Northern Ireland).
7 Cohen, J. (1997), "Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy", In Bohman, J. and Rehg, W. (eds.) Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 407-438.
8 Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (2005), "14th Plenary Meeting Minute", January 2005(Doc 935).
9 Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (2006), Managing Our Radioactive Waste Safely: CoRWM's Recommendations to Government. CoRWM Doc 700. London: Committee on Radioactive Waste Management.
10 Department of Trade and Industry (2003), Our Energy Future-Creating a Low Carbon Economy. London: TSO (The Stationery Office).
11 Dryzek, J. (2000), Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12 Elster, J. (1998), Deliberative Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13 Eriksen, E. O. and Weigard, J. (2003) Understanding Habermas: Communicative Action and Deliberative Democracy, London and New York: Continuum Press.
14 Fraser, N. (1990) "Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy", Social Text, 25/26: 56-80.
15 Hendriks, C. (2004), "Public Deliberation and Interest Organizations: A Study of Responses to Lay Citizens Engagement in Public Policy", Unpublished PhD Thesis at the Australian National University.
16 House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (2004), Radioactive Waste Management, London: HMSO.
17 Luskin, R. C. and Fishkin, J. S. (2002), "Deliberation and 'Better Citizens'", A research paper available from the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University. Available from (http://cdd.stanford.edu/research/papers/2002/bettercitizens.pdf).
18 Levidow, L. (2007), "European Public Participation as Risk Governance: Enhancing Democratic Accountability for Agbiotech Policy?", East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal, 1(1): 19-51.   DOI
19 Levine P., Fung, A. and Gastil, J. (2005), "Future Directions for Public Deliberation", Journal of Public Deliberation, 1(1): 1-13.
20 Lovbrand, E., Pielke, R. Jr. and Beck, S. (2011), "A Democracy Paradox in Studies of Science and Technology", Science, Technology, & Human Values, 36(4): 474-496.   DOI
21 Mackerron, G. and Berkhout, F. (2009), "Learning to Listen: Institutional Change and Legitimation in UK Radioactive Waste Policy", Journal of Risk Research, 12(7-8): 989-1008.   DOI
22 Pellizzoni, L. (2001), "The Myth of the Best Argument: Power, Deliberation and Reason", British Journal of Sociology, 52(1): 59-86.   DOI
23 Renn, O. (1998), "The Role of Risk Communication and Public Dialogue for Improving Risk Management", Risk Decision and Policy, 3(1): 5-30.   DOI
24 Steele, J. (2001), "Participation and Deliberation in Environmental Law: Exploring a Problem-solving Approach", Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 21(3): 415-442.   DOI
25 Stern, P. and Fineberg, H. (eds.) (1996), Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society, Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
26 Kemp, R.V., Bennett, D. G. and White, M.J. (2006), "Recent Trends and Developments in Dialogue on Radioactive Waste Management: Experience from the UK', Environment International, 32(8): 1021-1032.   DOI
27 Wilsdon, J. and Willis, R. (2004), See-through SCIENCE: Why public engagement needs to move upstream. London: Demos.