Advertisement

Environmental Management

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 321–330 | Cite as

The Delphi approach to the mediation of environmental disputes

  • Alan Miller
  • Wilf Cuff
Profile

Abstract

Environmental disputes, in many countries, have taken on a ritualistic character. Their persistence, even after prolonged analysis and debate, suggests that they result from ideological rather than factual differences. Since no single ideological position holds a monopoly on the truth, effective environmental management would seem to require an integration of views, the problem being how to achieve this. One approach to this problem is illustrated in this article. Two factions in the spruce budworm dispute in New Brunswick, Canada, were engaged in a mediation exercise using the Delphi method. Details of the design and execution of this form of mediation are provided, together with an evaluation of the Delphi's effectiveness in this context.

Key words

Environmental disputes Forest management Delphi method Canada Spruce budworm 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Buss, D., and Craik, K. 1983. Contemporary world views: personal and policy implications.Journal of Applied Social Psychology 13:259–280.Google Scholar
  2. Cotgrove, S. 1982. Catastrophe or cornucopia: the environment, politics and the future. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Ehrmann, J., and P. Bidol. 1982. A bibliography on natural resources and environmental conflict: management strategies and processes. Bibliography no. 84, Council of Planning Librarians, Chicago.Google Scholar
  4. Fischhoff, B., S. Lichtenstein, P. Slovic, S. Derby, and R. Keeney. 1981. Acceptable risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  5. Folberg, J., and A. Taylor. 1984. Mediation: a comprehensive guide to resolving conflicts without litigation. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  6. Holling, C. 1978. Adaptive environmental assessment and management. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Kendall, S., and E. MacKintosh. 1978. Management problems of polydisciplinary environmental research projects in the university setting. Publication no. 86, Centre for Resources Development, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.Google Scholar
  8. Lesnick, M., and J. Crowfoot. 1981. A bibliography for the study of natural resource and environmental conflict. Bibliography no. 64. Council of Planning Librarians, Chicago.Google Scholar
  9. Lyons, H. 1982. The Delphi technique for problem solving.Personnel Management 14:42–45.Google Scholar
  10. Mason, R. 1978. The critical potential of knowledge: environmental studies and the matrix of power. PhD thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto.Google Scholar
  11. Matthews, W. 1975. Objective and subjective judgments in environmental impact assessment.Environmental Conservation 2:121–131.Google Scholar
  12. May, E. 1982. Budworm battles. Four East Publications, Tantallon, Canada.Google Scholar
  13. Miller, A. 1984a. Professional collaboration in environmental management: the effectiveness of expert groups.Journal of Environmental Management 16:365–388.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, A. 1984b. Professional dissent and environmental management.Environmentalist 4:143–152.Google Scholar
  15. Nelkin, D. and M. Pollak. 1979. Consensus and conflict resolution: the politics of assessing risk.Science and Public Policy 6:307–318.Google Scholar
  16. Orr, D., and S. Hill. 1979. Leviathan, the open society, and the crisis of ecology.In D. Orr and M. Soroos (eds.), The global predicament: ecological perspectives on world order. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Petak, W. 1980. Environmental planning and management: the need for an integrative perspective.Environmental Management 4:287–295.Google Scholar
  18. Radford, K. 1977. Complex decision problems: an integrated strategy for resolution. Reston Publishing Company, Reston, Virginia.Google Scholar
  19. Sills, D. 1975. The environmental movement and its critics.Human Ecology 3:1–41.Google Scholar
  20. Torgerson, D. 1980. Industrialization and assessment: social impact assessment as a social phenomenon. York University Publications in Northern Studies, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
  21. Turoff, M. 1975. The policy Delphi.In H. Linstone and M. Turoff (eds.), The Delphi method: techniques and applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan Miller
    • 1
  • Wilf Cuff
    • 2
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of New BrunswickFrederictonCanada
  2. 2.Maritime Forest Research CentreFrederictonCanada

Personalised recommendations