Search

A central concern in policy studies is understanding how multiple, contending groups in society interact, deliberate, and forge agreements over policy issues. Often, public discourse turns from engagement into impasse, as in the fractured politics of climate policy in the USA. Existing theories are unclear about how such an 'adversarial turn' develops. We theorize that an important aspect of the adversarial turn is the evolution of a group's narrative into what can be understood as an ideology, the formation of which is observable through certain textual-linguistic properties. Analysis 'of' these narrative properties elucidates the role of narrative in fostering (1) coalescence around a group ideology, and (2) group isolation and isolation of ideological coalitions from others' influence. By examining a climate skeptical narrative, we demonstrate how to analyze ideological properties of narrative, and illustrate the role of ideological narratives in galvanizing and, subsequently, isolating groups in society. We end the piece with a reflection on further issues suggested by the narrative analysis, such as the possibility that climate skepticism is founded upon a more 'genetic' meta-narrative that has roots in social issues far removed from climate, which means efforts at better communicating climate change science may not suffice to support action on climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A dominant form of integrated water resources management (IWRM) assumes that existing parochial path dependencies need to be overcome to transform fragmented, contested regimes into the integrative design of IWRM. This paper is an exploratory study of stakeholder perceptions around China's Yellow River, which has been hailed as a successful case of IWRM. We find that while water reforms have ostensibly achieved a programme that adheres to the formal discourse of IWRM, subjective perceptions of the stakeholders, as revealed by the Q methodology, still display elements of a localized, fragmented narrative, requiring constant negotiation. Primary elements of the discourse include the following positions: (1) localized, contextual approaches to governance persist; (2) market efficiency and environmental protection are seen as competing goals; and (3) technology creates new gains, but constant negotiation is needed to distribute them fairly. These narratives show that rather than 'overturning' old paths, the water reforms created a deliberatory arena in which old and new ideas meld into what we refer to as a 'thick' institutional narrative. Our work provides a new perspective on policy change, as well as the persistence of institutional life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Networks have been embraced as appropriate means for environmental governance because of their potential inclusivity, flexibility, resilience, and ability to comprehend multiple values and ways of knowing. Analysis of networks, however, falls short of accounting for the emergence and persistence of these innovative and complex modes of governance, as well as their failures. We offer a framework for using narrative to understand and evaluate networks. We understand networks to be sets of relationships, between humans and also between humans and their environment, that define and guide behaviour. Narrative is a constitutive element of these networks; narrative and network are co-produced. Narrative analysis enables a critical investigation of environmental action and policy that at the same time captures the variety of environmental relationships and associated meanings and emotions that can inspire collaborative behaviour. Using a case study of the development of alternative agriculture in the United States, we provide a methodology for investigating ‘narrative-networks’ that affords deeper explanations of how and why emergent, often informal and unlikely, environmental networks endure over time. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Highlights: [•] Proposes and tests a new model of collective action, based on vector payoffs. [•] Illustrates how the model better addresses normative aspects of environmental behavior. [•] Illustrates how the model better explains the power of social networks in engendering cooperation. [•] Argues for institutional arrangements that increase recognition of effects on particular others. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The extensive literature on environmental justice has, by now, well defined the essential ingredients of cumulative risk, namely, incompatible land uses and vulnerability. Most problematic is the case when risk is produced by a large aggregation of small sources of air toxics. In this article, we test these notions in an area of Southern California, Southeast Los Angeles (SELA), which has come to be known as Asthmatown. Developing a rapid risk mapping protocol, we scan the neighborhood for small potential sources of air toxics and find, literally, hundreds of small point sources within a 2-mile radius, interspersed with residences. We also map the estimated cancer risks and noncancer hazard indices across the landscape. We find that, indeed, such large aggregations of even small, nondominant sources of air toxics can produce markedly elevated levels of risk. In this study, the risk profiles show additional cancer risks of up to 800 in a million and noncancer hazard indices of up to 200 in SELA due to the agglomeration of small point sources. This is significant (for example, estimates of the average regional point-source-related cancer risk range from 125 to 200 in a million). Most importantly, if we were to talk about the risk contour as if they were geological structures, we would observe not only a handful of distinct peaks, but a general “mountain range” running all throughout the study area, which underscores the ubiquity of risk in SELA. Just as cumulative risk has deeply embedded itself into the fabric of the place, so, too, must intervention seek to embed strategies into the institutions and practices of SELA. This has implications for advocacy, as seen in a recently initiated participatory action research project aimed at building health research capacities into the community in keeping with an ethic of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Emissions trading is, essentially, a policy instrument that is designed to simulate a market for an otherwise public good. Conceptually, its justification hinges on a number of key assumptions, namely the negligibility of local impacts, the ability to separate and commodify the good in question, and characteristics of a well-functioning market. The authors examine the performance of RECLAIM, a NO x emissions trading program in Southern California, USA, and illustrate how to test these assumptions. There is some evidence that the trading of NO x generates new externalities, such as the possibility that other air pollutants, e.g. volatile organics, are essentially traded along with it. Moreover, the RECLAIM program has recently begun to experience difficulties due to the fact that the market is relatively thin. This analysis provides ways to assess more deeply and reform these trading regimes, including opening up RECLAIM to public review. The case study speaks to a wider arena, as emissions trading is presently being considered in other parts of the world to address issues ranging from acid rain to non-point source pollution to greenhouse gases. The analytic approach, illustrated herein, is a general one that has a wider applicability than the particular case of NO x trading. It is hoped that this kind of critical inquiry can lead to a more careful deliberation of the merits and challenges of emissions trading. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]