Skip to main content

Distributed Responsibility in Risk Governance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sustainable Risk Management

Part of the book series: Strategies for Sustainability ((STSU))

Abstract

The principles of responsibility and accountability have increasingly become a significant concept for the political capability to act independently and make decisions without superior authorization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    For different ways on how public deliberation could work at the core of formal democratic decision making, see Goodin (2008). Cf. also Warren and Pearse (2008) who analyze the case of a citizen assembly in British Columbia, Canada, that was empowered to make a decision on the electoral system which led to a referendum. Cf. also Chambers (2012).

  2. 2.

    For the definition and explanation of complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity, see Klinke and Renn 2012, 2014).

References

  • Bäckstrand, K. (2003). Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 24–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (1992). Risk society. Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beierle, T. C., & Cayford, J. (2002). Democracy in practice. Public participation in environmental decisions. Resources for the Future: Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M. (2011). Governance as theory, practice and dilemma. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The sage handbook of governance (pp. 1–16). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forst, R. (2001). The rule of Reasons. Three models of deliberative democracy. Ratio Juris, 14(4), 345–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz, S. A., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for a post-normal age. Futures, 25, 739–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R. E. (2008). Innovating democracy. Democratic theory and practice after the deliberative turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R. E., & Dryzek, J. S. (2006). Deliberative impacts: The macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Politics & Society, 34(2), 219–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haas, P. M. (2004). When does power listen to truth? A constructivist approach to the policy process. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4), 569–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hampel, J., Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2001). Beyond “red” hope and “green” distrust. Public perceptions of genetic engineering in Germany. Polite, 16(60), 68–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • IRGC, International Risk Governance Council. (2013). Risk governance guidelines for unconventional gas developments. Lausanne: IRGC.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, B. (1997). Deliberative democracy and effective social freedom: Capabilities, resources and opportunities. In J. Bohman, & W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative democracy. Essays on reason and politics (pp. 321–348). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (1990). The fifth branch: science advisors as policymakers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A. (2006). Demokratisches REGIeren jenseits des Staates. Deliberative Politik im nordamerikanischen Große Seen-Regime. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A. (2009). Deliberative Politik in transnationalen Räumen—demokratische Legitimation und Effektivität der grenzüberschreitenden Wasser- und Umweltpolitik zwischen Kanada und USA. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 50(4), 774–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A. (2016). Democratic theory. In C. Ansell & J. Torfing (Eds.), Handbook on theories of governance (pp. 86–100). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., Dreyer, M., Renn, O., Stirling, A., & van Zwanenberg, P. (2006). Precautionary risk regulation in European governance. Journal of Risk Research, 9(4), 373–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2002). A new approach to risk evaluation and management: risk-based, precaution-based and discourse-based strategies. Risk Analysis, 22(6), 1071–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2010). Risk governance: Contemporary and future challenges. In J. Eriksson, M. Gilek, & C. Ruden (Eds.), Regulating chemical risk: Multidisciplinary perspectives on european and global challenges (pp. 9–27). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2014). Expertise and experience: A deliberative system of a functional division of labor for post-normal risk governance. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 27(4), 442–465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2012). Adaptive and integrative governance on risk and uncertainty. Journal of Risk Research, 15(3), 273–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberatore, A., & Funtowicz, S. A. (2003). ‘Democratizing’ expertise, ‘expertising’ democracy: What does this mean, and why bother? Science and Public Policy, 30(3), 146–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, M. K., & Warren, M. E. (2012). Two trust-based uses of minipublics in democratic systems. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. Deliberative democracy at a larger scale (pp. 95–124). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J. (2006). Conflict and self-interest in deliberation. In S. Besson, & J. L. Marti (Eds.) Deliberative democracy and its discontent (pp. 107–132). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Follesdal, A., Fung, A., Lafont, C., Manin, B., & Marti, J. L. (2010). The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 64–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., Parkinson, J., Thompson, D. F., & Warren,M. E. (2012). A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. Deliberative democracy at a larger scale, (pp. 1–26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2008). Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. Washington: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkinson, J. (2006). Deliberating in the real world. Problems of Legitimacy in Deliberative Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., Webler, T., & Wiedemann, P. M. (Eds.). (1995). Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., Klinke, A., & van Asselt, M. (2011). Coping with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity in risk governance: A synthesis. AMBIO, 40(2), 231–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (2015). Ethikkommission: Wie legitim ist die Legitimation der Politik durch Wissenschaft? In P. Weingart, & G.G. Wagner (Eds.), Wissenschaftliche Politikberatung im Praxistest (pp. 17–34). Velbrück: Weilerswist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simone, C. (2012). Deliberation and mass democracy. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. deliberative democracy at a larger scale (pp. 52–71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, C. (2012). Rational Deliberation among Experts and Citizens. In J. Mansbridge, & J. Parkinson (Eds.), Deliberative systems. Deliberative democracy at a larger scale (pp. 27–51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WBGU. (2000a). German Advisory Council on Global Environmental Change. World in Transition. Strategies for Managing Global Environmental Risks. Annual Report 1998. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • WBGU. (2000b). German Advisory Council on Global Environmental Change. World in Transition. Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biosphere. Annual Report 1999. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky, A. B. (1987). Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Klinke .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Klinke, A., Renn, O. (2018). Distributed Responsibility in Risk Governance. In: Wilderer, P., Renn, O., Grambow, M., Molls, M., Mainzer, K. (eds) Sustainable Risk Management. Strategies for Sustainability. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66233-6_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics